Quality Analysis of YouTube and Facebook Videos for Glaucoma Treatment Options

Soshian Sarrafpour,1 Akash Maheshwari,2 Jun Hui Lee,3 Benjamin K Young,4 Ji Liu,1 Christopher C Teng5 1Department of Ophthalmology & Visual Science, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA; 2School of Medicine, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, Lubbock, TX, USA; 3Department of Ophthalmology, Keck School of Medicine of USC, Los Angeles, CA, USA; 4Casey Eye Institute, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, OR, USA; 5Department of Ophthalmology & Visual Sciences, UMass Chan Medical School, Worcester, MA, USACorrespondence: Soshian Sarrafpour, Department of Ophthalmology & Visual Science, Yale School of Medicine, 40 Temple Street, Suite 3D, New Haven, CT, 06510, USA, Tel +1-203-377-4337, Fax +1-203-785-6220, Email soshian.sarrafpour@yale.eduPurpose: Patients increasingly seek information about medical treatment options from the internet. This study evaluated the quality and accuracy of YouTube and Facebook videos on glaucoma treatment options.Methods: A comprehensive search of “glaucoma” and “eye pressure” combined with “treatment” or “cure” was performed. YouTube videos with at least 25,000 views and 25 views per day and Facebook videos with at least 1000 total views were included. Videos were excluded if they were not in English or about humans. The quality of videos was evaluated by two independent reviewers using a modified Currency, Relevance, Authority, Accuracy, and Criteria (CRAAP) metric. Videos were categorized as educational, testimonial, or advertisement.Results: A total of 74 YouTube videos and 19 Facebook videos were included. Of the YouTube videos, 89.7% were educational, 5.5% testimonials, and 4.8% adverts. Of the Facebook videos, 65.8% were educational, 21.1% testimonials, and 13.2% adverts. The inter-rater reliability was acceptable after kappa values were calculated. Fifteen percent of YouTube videos and eighteen percent of Facebook videos were graded as containing misinformation or misleading information. Audio and video quality scores were similar between categories. Higher accuracy and comprehensiveness scores were seen for educational videos. Seventy-four percent of YouTube videos and 66% of Facebook videos addressed the question of what is glaucoma, 65% of YouTube videos and 47% of Facebook videos discussed the course of untreated disease, 64% of YouTube videos and 34% of Facebook videos discussed the goals of treatment, and only 17% of YouTube videos and 0% of Facebook videos discussed the risks of the proposed treatment options.Conclusion: Patients are increasingly using YouTube and Facebook for medical information. This study found that many videos lack useful information and some provide information that may be detrimental. Physicians should be aware of this risk and educate patients appropriately.Keywords: glaucoma treatment, YouTube, Facebook, patient education