YouTube™ as an information resource for orthognathic surgery

Emmett Hegarty; Ciara Campbell; Ektor Grammatopoulos; Andrew T DiBiase; Martyn Sherriff; Martyn T Cobourne

doi:10.1080/14653125.2017.1319010

YouTube™ as an information resource for orthognathic surgery

Emmett Hegarty, Ciara Campbell, Ektor Grammatopoulos, Andrew T DiBiase, Martyn Sherriff, Martyn T Cobourne

Bristol Dental School

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article (Academic Journal) › peer-review

24 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To investigate video content on YouTube™ related to orthognathic surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: YouTube™ was searched using the terms: orthognathic surgery; orthodontic surgery; jaw surgery; jaw corrective surgery. Inclusion criteria included English language; primary content orthognathic surgery and acceptable audio-visual quality. Videos were sorted into the top 50 for each search term by view-count and into an overall top 60 from the four searches. The following parameters were recorded for each video: number of views; likes; dislikes; source; primary intention. Each was classified according to information content as 'excellent', 'moderate' or 'poor'. A pre-determined list of orthognathic surgery-related information domains was also evaluated.

RESULTS: The top 60 videos had a combined total of 6,986,141 views. Videos predominantly involved patients describing their personal experience (41.67%) with the majority positively biased (61.67%). Only 9.17% of videos were classified as having excellent general information content and 55.83% were rated as poor. Surgical procedures were described in 45% whilst the need for pre- and post-surgical orthodontics was discussed in 33% and 16%, respectively. Post-operative paraesthesia was discussed in 17.5% of videos outcome.

CONCLUSIONS: Video content on YouTube™ relating to orthognathic surgery is substandard and patients should be advised to view it with caution.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	1-7
Number of pages	7
Journal	Journal of Orthodontics
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1080/14653125.2017.1319010
Publication status	Published - 2 May 2017

Keywords

Journal Article

Access to Document

10.1080/14653125.2017.1319010

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'YouTube™ as an information resource for orthognathic surgery'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this

@article{aebb0a1001a943fab7817bd452f90af2,

title = "YouTube{\texttrademark} as an information resource for orthognathic surgery",

abstract = "OBJECTIVE: To investigate video content on YouTube{\texttrademark} related to orthognathic surgery.MATERIALS AND METHODS: YouTube{\texttrademark} was searched using the terms: orthognathic surgery; orthodontic surgery; jaw surgery; jaw corrective surgery. Inclusion criteria included English language; primary content orthognathic surgery and acceptable audio-visual quality. Videos were sorted into the top 50 for each search term by view-count and into an overall top 60 from the four searches. The following parameters were recorded for each video: number of views; likes; dislikes; source; primary intention. Each was classified according to information content as 'excellent', 'moderate' or 'poor'. A pre-determined list of orthognathic surgery-related information domains was also evaluated.RESULTS: The top 60 videos had a combined total of 6,986,141 views. Videos predominantly involved patients describing their personal experience (41.67%) with the majority positively biased (61.67%). Only 9.17% of videos were classified as having excellent general information content and 55.83% were rated as poor. Surgical procedures were described in 45% whilst the need for pre- and post-surgical orthodontics was discussed in 33% and 16%, respectively. Post-operative paraesthesia was discussed in 17.5% of videos outcome.CONCLUSIONS: Video content on YouTube{\texttrademark} relating to orthognathic surgery is substandard and patients should be advised to view it with caution.",

keywords = "Journal Article",

author = "Emmett Hegarty and Ciara Campbell and Ektor Grammatopoulos and DiBiase, {Andrew T} and Martyn Sherriff and Cobourne, {Martyn T}",

year = "2017",

month = may,

day = "2",

doi = "10.1080/14653125.2017.1319010",

language = "English",

pages = "1--7",

journal = "Journal of Orthodontics",

issn = "1465-3125",

publisher = "Taylor & Francis Group",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - YouTube™ as an information resource for orthognathic surgery

AU - Hegarty, Emmett

AU - Campbell, Ciara

AU - Grammatopoulos, Ektor

AU - DiBiase, Andrew T

AU - Sherriff, Martyn

AU - Cobourne, Martyn T

PY - 2017/5/2

Y1 - 2017/5/2

N2 - OBJECTIVE: To investigate video content on YouTube™ related to orthognathic surgery.MATERIALS AND METHODS: YouTube™ was searched using the terms: orthognathic surgery; orthodontic surgery; jaw surgery; jaw corrective surgery. Inclusion criteria included English language; primary content orthognathic surgery and acceptable audio-visual quality. Videos were sorted into the top 50 for each search term by view-count and into an overall top 60 from the four searches. The following parameters were recorded for each video: number of views; likes; dislikes; source; primary intention. Each was classified according to information content as 'excellent', 'moderate' or 'poor'. A pre-determined list of orthognathic surgery-related information domains was also evaluated.RESULTS: The top 60 videos had a combined total of 6,986,141 views. Videos predominantly involved patients describing their personal experience (41.67%) with the majority positively biased (61.67%). Only 9.17% of videos were classified as having excellent general information content and 55.83% were rated as poor. Surgical procedures were described in 45% whilst the need for pre- and post-surgical orthodontics was discussed in 33% and 16%, respectively. Post-operative paraesthesia was discussed in 17.5% of videos outcome.CONCLUSIONS: Video content on YouTube™ relating to orthognathic surgery is substandard and patients should be advised to view it with caution.

AB - OBJECTIVE: To investigate video content on YouTube™ related to orthognathic surgery.MATERIALS AND METHODS: YouTube™ was searched using the terms: orthognathic surgery; orthodontic surgery; jaw surgery; jaw corrective surgery. Inclusion criteria included English language; primary content orthognathic surgery and acceptable audio-visual quality. Videos were sorted into the top 50 for each search term by view-count and into an overall top 60 from the four searches. The following parameters were recorded for each video: number of views; likes; dislikes; source; primary intention. Each was classified according to information content as 'excellent', 'moderate' or 'poor'. A pre-determined list of orthognathic surgery-related information domains was also evaluated.RESULTS: The top 60 videos had a combined total of 6,986,141 views. Videos predominantly involved patients describing their personal experience (41.67%) with the majority positively biased (61.67%). Only 9.17% of videos were classified as having excellent general information content and 55.83% were rated as poor. Surgical procedures were described in 45% whilst the need for pre- and post-surgical orthodontics was discussed in 33% and 16%, respectively. Post-operative paraesthesia was discussed in 17.5% of videos outcome.CONCLUSIONS: Video content on YouTube™ relating to orthognathic surgery is substandard and patients should be advised to view it with caution.

KW - Journal Article

U2 - 10.1080/14653125.2017.1319010

DO - 10.1080/14653125.2017.1319010

M3 - Article (Academic Journal)

C2 - 28463076

SP - 1

EP - 7

JO - Journal of Orthodontics

JF - Journal of Orthodontics

SN - 1465-3125

ER -