Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

YouTube as a source of information on pediatric scoliosis: a reliability and educational quality analysis

  • Review Article
  • Published:
Spine Deformity Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

To assess the reliability and educational quality of YouTube videos related to pediatric scoliosis.

Methods

In December 2020, searches of “pediatric scoliosis”, “idiopathic scoliosis”, “scoliosis in children”, and “curved spine in children” were conducted using YouTube. The first 50 results of each search were analyzed according to upload source and content. The Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) Benchmark Criteria were used to assess reliability (score 0–4), and educational quality was evaluated using the Global Quality Score (GQS; score 0–5) and Pediatric Scoliosis-Specific Score (PSS; score 0–15). Differences in scores based on upload source and content were determined by Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) or Kruskal–Wallis tests. Multivariate linear regressions identified any independent predictors of reliability and educational quality.

Results

After eliminating duplicates, 153 videos were analyzed. Videos were viewed 28.5 million times in total, averaging 186,160.3 ± 1,012,485.0 views per video. Physicians (54.2%) and medical sources (19.0%) were the most common upload sources, and content was primarily categorized as disease-specific (50.0%) and patient experience (25.5%). Videos uploaded by patients achieved significantly lower JAMA scores (p = 0.004). Conversely, academic or physician-uploaded videos scored higher on PSS (p = 0.003) and demonstrated a trend towards improved GQS (p = 0.051). Multivariate analysis determined longer video duration predicted higher scores on all measures. However, there were no independent associations between upload source or content and assessment scores.

Conclusion

YouTube contains a large repository of videos concerning pediatric scoliosis; however, the reliability and educational quality of these videos were low.

Level of evidence.

V.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Choudhry MN, Ahmad Z, Verma R (2016) Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Open Orthop J 10:143–154. https://doi.org/10.2174/1874325001610010143

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Konieczny MR, Senyurt H, Krauspe R (2013) Epidemiology of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. J Child Orthop 7(1):3–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11832-012-0457-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Wong HK, Hui JH, Rajan U, Chia HP (2005) Idiopathic scoliosis in Singapore schoolchildren: a prevalence study 15 years into the screening program. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 30(10):1188–1196. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.brs.0000162280.95076.bb

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Cilli K, Tezeren G, Tas T et al (2009) School screening for scoliosis in Sivas, Turkey. Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc 43(5):426–430. https://doi.org/10.3944/AOTT.2009.426

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Soucacos PN, Soucacos PK, Zacharis KC, Beris AE, Xenakis TA (1997) School-screening for scoliosis. A prospective epidemiological study in northwestern and central Greece. J Bone Jt Surg Am 79(10):1498–1503. https://doi.org/10.2106/00004623-199710000-00006

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Sud A, Tsirikos AI (2013) Current concepts and controversies on adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: part I. Indian J Orthop 47(2):117–128. https://doi.org/10.4103/0019-5413.108875

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Matsumoto M, Watanabe K, Hosogane N, Toyama Y (2014) Updates on surgical treatments for pediatric scoliosis. J Orthop Sci 19(1):6–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00776-013-0474-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Hresko MT (2013) Clinical practice. Idiopathic scoliosis in adolescents. N Engl J Med 368(9):834–841. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMcp1209063

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Finney Rutten LJ, Blake KD, Greenberg-Worisek AJ, Allen SV, Moser RP, Hesse BW (2019) Online health information seeking among US adults: measuring progress toward a healthy people 2020 objective. Public Health Rep 134(6):617–625. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033354919874074

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Statistics for YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/intl/en-GB/about/press/. Accessed 21 Dec 2020

  11. Winnick S, Lucas DO, Hartman AL, Toll D (2005) How do you improve compliance? Pediatrics 115(6):e718-724. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2004-1133

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Agency O (2020) YouTube by the numbers: stats, demographics & fun facts. https://www.omnicoreagency.com/youtube-statistics/. Updated 28 Oct 2020. Accessed 23 Dec 2020

  13. Murray E, Lo B, Pollack L et al (2003) The impact of health information on the Internet on health care and the physician-patient relationship: national U.S. survey among 1.050 U.S. physicians. J Med Internet Res 5(3):e17. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.5.3.e17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Singh AG, Singh S, Singh PP (2012) YouTube for information on rheumatoid arthritis—a wakeup call? J Rheumatol 39(5):899–903. https://doi.org/10.3899/jrheum.111114

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Erdem MN, Karaca S (2018) Evaluating the accuracy and quality of the information in kyphosis videos shared on YouTube. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 43(22):E1334–E1339. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0000000000002691

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Kunze KN, Cohn MR, Wakefield C et al (2019) YouTube as a source of information about the posterior cruciate ligament: a content-quality and reliability analysis. Arthrosc Sports Med Rehabil 1(2):e109–e114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asmr.2019.09.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Silberg WM, Lundberg GD, Musacchio RA (1997) Assessing, controlling, and assuring the quality of medical information on the Internet: caveant lector et viewor—let the reader and viewer beware. JAMA 277(15):1244–1245

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. AAOS (2020) Introduction to scoliosis. https://orthoinfo.aaos.org/en/diseases--conditions/introduction-to-scoliosis/. Accessed 1 Dec 2020

  19. MacLeod MG, Hoppe DJ, Simunovic N, Bhandari M, Philippon MJ, Ayeni OR (2015) YouTube as an information source for femoroacetabular impingement: a systematic review of video content. Arthroscopy 31(1):136–142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arthro.2014.06.009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Kuru T, Erken HY (2020) Evaluation of the quality and reliability of YouTube videos on rotator cuff tears. Cureus 12(2):e6852. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.6852

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Keelan J, Pavri-Garcia V, Tomlinson G, Wilson K (2007) YouTube as a source of information on immunization: a content analysis. JAMA 298(21):2482–2484. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.298.21.2482

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Murugiah K, Vallakati A, Rajput K, Sood A, Challa NR (2011) YouTube as a source of information on cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Resuscitation 82(3):332–334. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2010.11.015

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Pandey A, Patni N, Singh M, Sood A, Singh G (2010) YouTube as a source of information on the H1N1 influenza pandemic. Am J Prev Med 38(3):e1-3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2009.11.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Pant S, Deshmukh A, Murugiah K, Kumar G, Sachdeva R, Mehta JL (2012) Assessing the credibility of the “YouTube approach” to health information on acute myocardial infarction. Clin Cardiol 35(5):281–285. https://doi.org/10.1002/clc.21981

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Sajadi KP, Goldman HB (2011) Social networks lack useful content for incontinence. Urology 78(4):764–767. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2011.04.074

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Stamelou M, Edwards MJ, Espay AJ et al (2011) Movement disorders on YouTube—caveat spectator. N Engl J Med 365(12):1160–1161. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMc1107673

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Steinberg PL, Wason S, Stern JM, Deters L, Kowal B, Seigne J (2010) YouTube as source of prostate cancer information. Urology 75(3):619–622. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2008.07.059

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Stephen K, Cumming GP (2012) Searching for pelvic floor muscle exercises on YouTube: what individuals may find and where this might fit with health service programmes to promote continence. Menopause Int 18(3):110–115. https://doi.org/10.1258/mi.2012.012007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Yoo JH, Kim J (2012) Obesity in the new media: a content analysis of obesity videos on YouTube. Health Commun 27(1):86–97. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2011.569003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Hornung AL, Rudisill SS, Suleiman RW et al (2021) Low back pain: what is the role of YouTube content in patient education? J Orthop Res. https://doi.org/10.1002/jor.25104

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Madathil KC, Rivera-Rodriguez AJ, Greenstein JS, Gramopadhye AK (2015) Healthcare information on YouTube: a systematic review. Health Inform J 21(3):173–194. https://doi.org/10.1177/1460458213512220

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Desai T, Shariff A, Dhingra V, Minhas D, Eure M, Kats M (2013) Is content really king? An objective analysis of the public’s response to medical videos on YouTube. PLoS ONE 8(12):e82469. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0082469

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. iProspect (2006) iProspect search engine user behavior study

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research received no specific grant from any agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Funding

This research received no specific grant from any agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Spine Surgery, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Rush University Medical Center, 1611 W. Harrison Street, Chicago, IL, 60612, USA

    Samuel S. Rudisill, Nour Z. Saleh, Alexander L. Hornung, Shadi Zbeidi, Roohi M. Ali, Zakariah K. Siyaji, Junyoung Ahn, Michael T. Nolte, Gregory D. Lopez & Arash J. Sayari

Authors
  1. Samuel S. Rudisill
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Nour Z. Saleh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Alexander L. Hornung
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Shadi Zbeidi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Roohi M. Ali
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Zakariah K. Siyaji
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Junyoung Ahn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Michael T. Nolte
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Gregory D. Lopez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Arash J. Sayari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

SSR: study design; data collection; data analysis; manuscript preparation, approval of final manuscript; agree to be accountable for all aspects of work. NZS: study design; data collection; manuscript preparation; approval of final manuscript; agree to be accountable for all aspects of work. ALH: study design; critical revision of manuscript; approval of final manuscript; agree to be accountable for all aspects of work. SZ: data collection; data analysis; critical revision of manuscript critical; approval of final manuscript; agree to be accountable for all aspects of work. RMA: study design; critical revision of manuscript; approval of final manuscript; agree to be accountable for all aspects of work. ZKS: study design; data collection; critical revision of manuscript; approval of final manuscript; agree to be accountable for all aspects of work. JA: study design; critical revision of manuscript; approval of final manuscript; agree to be accountable for all aspects of work. MTN: study design; critical revision of manuscript; approval of final manuscript; agree to be accountable for all aspects of work. GDL: study design; critical revision of manuscript; approval of final manuscript; agree to be accountable for all aspects of work. AJS: study design; critical revision of manuscript; approval of final manuscript; agree to be accountable for all aspects of work.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Samuel S. Rudisill.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to declare.

Ethical approval

IRB approval was not required for this study.

Informed consent

The current study did not require recruitment and consenting of study subjects.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (PDF 148 KB)

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Rudisill, S.S., Saleh, N.Z., Hornung, A.L. et al. YouTube as a source of information on pediatric scoliosis: a reliability and educational quality analysis. Spine Deform 11, 3–9 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s43390-022-00569-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s43390-022-00569-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation