Analysis of the Quality, Reliability, and Educational Content of YouTube Videos Concerning Spine Tumors

Background: Given the high volume of user traffic to YouTube, it is important that the medical information disseminated on this platform is of high quality. Unfortunately, previous studies have demonstrated this to not be the case. We aimed to evaluate the quality and educational content of YouTube videos concerning spine tumors using 2 previously validated assessment tools. Methods: The first 50 videos returned by the keyword search "spine tumor" were included in the study. The JAMA benchmark criteria (range: 0-4) were used to assess video reliability, whereas the Global Quality Score (GQS) (range: 0-5) was used to determine educational quality and content. Results: Videos were primarily authored by academic medical groups (80%), while content was primarily related to disease-specific information (44%) or the patient experience (24%). Surgical treatment options and nonsurgical management were discussed in 66% and 50% of all videos, respectively. Sixty percent of videos reported benefits of treatment, while 44% reported potential risks or complications. The average JAMA score and GQS were 3.1 +/- 0.27 (range: 3-4) and 2.6 +/- 1.3 (range: 1-5), respectively. Multivariate linear regression analyses revealed that video duration (beta = 0.00697, P = 0.04) and number of views (beta = 0.000018, P = 0.001) were positively associated with JAMA score. Video duration and number of dislikes were associated with higher GQS (beta = 0.041, P = 0.025) and lower GQS (beta = -0.189, P = 0.04), respectively. Lastly, number of days since upload was associated with lower Video Power Index (beta = -0.003, P = 0.003). Conclusions: The reliability, quality, and educational content of YouTube videos were poor to suboptimal. Physicians should be wary of the education provided by YouTube on spine tumors and guide patients in seeking out additional sources of information.