Evaluating the Educational Value and Content Quality of YouTube Videos on Myasthenia Gravis


MERAL H. B., Aliyeva T., TOPLUTAŞ E.

Muscle and Nerve, cilt.72, sa.5, ss.1067-1073, 2025 (SCI-Expanded, Scopus) identifier identifier

  • Yayın Türü: Makale / Tam Makale
  • Cilt numarası: 72 Sayı: 5
  • Basım Tarihi: 2025
  • Doi Numarası: 10.1002/mus.28490
  • Dergi Adı: Muscle and Nerve
  • Derginin Tarandığı İndeksler: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), Scopus, BIOSIS, CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE
  • Sayfa Sayıları: ss.1067-1073
  • Anahtar Kelimeler: internet, myasthenia gravis, patient education, social media, YouTube
  • İstanbul Medipol Üniversitesi Adresli: Evet

Özet

Introduction/Aims: Although numerous YouTube videos on myasthenia gravis (MG) are available, the educational quality and comprehensiveness of this digital health information have not been assessed. This study addresses that gap using structured scoring tools to evaluate informational value for both patients and healthcare professionals. Methods: A systematic search on December 3, 2024, retrieved the top 50 English-language YouTube videos on MG. The videos were assessed using the modified DISCERN scale (1–5), Global Quality Scale (GQS; 1–5), and a custom comprehensiveness checklist (0–5). Descriptive, comparative, and inter-rater analyses were performed. Group comparisons used the Kruskal–Wallis test; associations were analyzed with Spearman's correlation. Results: Substantial agreement was observed (κ = 0.79). The median video duration was 8 min with a median of 53,459 views. The mean DISCERN score was 3.18 (±1.06), indicating moderate quality of treatment-related information; the mean GQS score was 2.88 (±1.02), reflecting moderate overall usefulness and coherence; and the mean comprehensiveness score was 2.78 (±1.11), showing moderate coverage of educational content. Higher comprehensiveness was positively associated with longer duration, more likes, and professional orientation (p < 0.05). The educational content varied: symptoms (84%) and treatments (70%) were commonly covered, whereas rehabilitation (8%) and long-term management (10%) were rarely included. Discussion: Although the mean scores indicated moderate quality, significant variability in educational depth was observed. The limited representation of rehabilitation and chronic care content suggests the need for more comprehensive and balanced digital resources on MG.