PD32-07 AN EVALUATION OF THE LANGUAGE COMPLEXITY AND CONTENT-QUALITY OF GOOD VS POOR PELVIC ORGAN PROLAPSE YOUTUBE TRANSCRIPTS

Abstract

You have accessJournal of UrologyUrodynamics/Lower Urinary Tract Dysfunction/Female Pelvic Medicine: Pelvic Prolapse (PD32)1 Sep 2021PD32-07 AN EVALUATION OF THE LANGUAGE COMPLEXITY AND CONTENT-QUALITY OF GOOD VS POOR PELVIC ORGAN PROLAPSE YOUTUBE TRANSCRIPTS Amber S. Herbert, Amy Nemirovsky, Deborah S. Hess, Dawn Walter, Nitya E. Abraham, Stacy Loeb, and Rena D. Malik Amber S. HerbertAmber S. Herbert More articles by this author , Amy NemirovskyAmy Nemirovsky More articles by this author , Deborah S. HessDeborah S. Hess More articles by this author , Dawn WalterDawn Walter More articles by this author , Nitya E. AbrahamNitya E. Abraham More articles by this author , Stacy LoebStacy Loeb More articles by this author , and Rena D. MalikRena D. Malik More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000002033.07AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: Approximately 90 million Americans have health literacy skills that are basic or below basic. Increasingly, individuals are using YouTube, the largest video-sharing site, to acquire medical knowledge. The objective of this study was to review the readability and quality of pelvic organ prolapse (POP) YouTube videos. METHODS: We analyzed the readability of written transcripts for the first 100 YouTube videos about “Pelvic Organ Prolapse.” Transcripts were excluded if they lacked narration in English or contained both no text and no audio. Readability was evaluated using an online software (www.readabilityformulas.com) to determine reading grade levels. The quality of videos was scored using the DISCERN quality criteria and the Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT). Accuracy was assessed by comparing content to accepted POP treatment guidelines. RESULTS: The median grade level of all 100 videos was 12.6 (Table 1). High quality transcripts or transcripts that discuss the benefits, risk, alternative treatments, and quality of life had a median readability score of 12.5. Over 80% of transcripts did not have commercial bias and these transcripts had a reading level exceeding the 12th grade. Transcripts with low misinformation (85%) had a higher median readability index (12.6), than transcripts containing high misinformation (12.2). More than 20% of transcripts discussed shared decision making and had a median readability score of 12.6. The median readability index for videos with a high PEMAT score (score >75%) for understandability and actionability were both 12.6. CONCLUSIONS: Transcripts of POP YouTube videos are written at difficult levels with many transcripts exceeding the reading capabilities of the American population. The majority of good transcripts or transcripts with high quality content, low misinformation, shared decision making, no commercial bias, and understandable and actionable content were written at a high school level or above. Efforts should be made to avoid complex terms when creating patient focused content and helping patients navigate to content of appropriate literacy online. Source of Funding: SL is supported by the Prostate Cancer Foundation and Department of Defense © 2021 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 206Issue Supplement 3September 2021Page: e547-e547 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2021 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Amber S. Herbert More articles by this author Amy Nemirovsky More articles by this author Deborah S. Hess More articles by this author Dawn Walter More articles by this author Nitya E. Abraham More articles by this author Stacy Loeb More articles by this author Rena D. Malik More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement Loading ...