English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Background Studies in patient literature particularly regarding online video literature in all fields are few. Scoring systems for video materials such as the validated PEMAT(Patient Education Material Assessment Tool)  have been used before to look at video patient literature. The aim of this study is to use the PEMAT tool to evaluate the quality of Youtube patient literature on oesophageal cancer and look at the inter rater reliability between lay and medical scorers. Methods A Youtube search was performed in April 2021 using the search terms “oesophageal cancer”, “esophageal cancer” “gullet cancer”. Characteristic data collected included language, ratings (thumbs up), type of video, country of origin and presence of advertising as well as intended audience. A PEMAT tool which is validated instrument to rate patient video material was used. A score of 70% is acceptable in the actionability and understandability domains. Cohen’s kappa coefficient was used to test inter-rater reliability between two lay person raters; and two medical raters. Results Seven sites were rated as understandable by the medical raters average and 13 were rated understandable by the lay raters average. Only two videos achieved best case scenario where both medical raters rated as understandable, rather than the average of both. Twelve videos were rated by both lay raters as understandable. Actionability rated poorer with only two videos rated as actionable on average by the medical raters and seven rated actionable by the lay raters on average. Conclusions Youtube videos on Oesophageal cancer score poorly in terms of actionability and understandability.

P-OGC50 An Objective Evaluation of Youtube Videos on Oesophageal Cancer using the PEMAT Score