4.5 Article

YouTube as a Source of Information on Neurosurgery

期刊

WORLD NEUROSURGERY
卷 105, 期 -, 页码 394-398

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2017.05.111

关键词

Neurosurgery; Online video content; Social media; YouTube

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BACKGROUND: The importance of videos in social media communications in the context of health care and neurosurgery is becoming increasingly recognized. However, there has not yet been a systematic analysis of these neurosurgery-related communications. Accordingly, this study was aimed at characterizing the online video content pertaining to neurosurgery. METHODS: Neurosurgery-related videos uploaded on YouTube were collected using a comprehensive search strategy. The following metrics were extracted for each video: number of views, likes, dislikes, comments, shares, date of upload, and geographic region of origin where specified. A quantitative and qualitative evaluation was performed on all videos included in the study. RESULTS: A total of 713 nonduplicate videos met the inclusion criteria. The overall number of views for all videos was 90,545,164. Videos were most frequently uploaded in 2016 (n =348), with a 200% increase in uploads compared with the previous year. Of the videos that were directly relevant to clinical neurosurgery, the most frequent video categories were educational videos (25%), followed by surgical and procedure overview (20%), promotional videos (17%), and patient experience (16%). The remainder of the videos consisted primarily of unrealistic simulations of cranial surgery for entertainment purposes (20%). - CONCLUSIONS: The findings from this study highlight the increasing use of video communications related to neurosurgery and show that institutions, neurosurgeons, and patients are using YouTube as an educational and promotional platform. As online communications continue to evolve, it will be important to harness this tool to advance patient-oriented communication and knowledge dissemination in neurosurgery.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据