Open AccessXigua Video as a Source of Information on Breast Cancer: Content Analysis
Author(s) -
Peng Pan,
Changhua Yu,
Tao Li,
Xilei Zhou,
Tingting Dai,
Hanhan Tian,
Yaozu Xiong
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
jmir. journal of medical internet research/journal of medical internet research
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.446
H-Index - 142
eISSN - 1439-4456
pISSN - 1438-8871
DOI - 10.2196/19668
Subject(s) - breast cancer , medicine , the internet , quality (philosophy) , video quality , reliability (semiconductor) , information quality , content analysis , point (geometry) , internet privacy , cancer , multimedia , computer science , world wide web , information system , social science , philosophy , operations management , mathematics , metric (unit) , sociology , power (physics) , geometry , epistemology , quantum mechanics , physics , economics , engineering , electrical engineering
Background Seeking health information on the internet is a popular trend. Xigua Video, a short video platform in China, ranks among the most accessed websites in the country and hosts an increasing number of videos with medical information. However, the nature of these videos is frequently unscientific, misleading, or even harmful. Objective Little is known about Xigua Video as a source of information on breast cancer. Thus, the study aimed to investigate the contents, quality, and reliability of breast cancer–related content on Xigua Video. Methods On February 4, 2020, a Xigua Video search was performed using the keyword “breast cancer.” Videos were categorized by 2 doctors based on whether the video content provided useful or misleading information. Furthermore, the reliability and quality of the videos were assessed using the 5-point DISCERN tool and 5-point global quality score criteria. Results Out of the 170 videos selected for the study, 64 (37.6%) were classified as useful, whereas 106 (62.4%) provided misleading information. A total of 41.8% videos (71/170) were generated by individuals compared to 19.4% videos (33/170) contributed by health care professionals. The topics mainly covered etiology, anatomy, symptoms, preventions, treatments, and prognosis. The top topic was “treatments” (119/170, 70%). The reliability scores and global quality scores of the videos in the useful information group were high ( P <.001). No differences were observed between the 2 groups in terms of video length, duration in months, and comments. The number of total views was higher for the misleading information group (819,478.5 vs 647,940) but did not reach a level of statistical significance ( P =.112). The uploading sources of the videos were mainly health care professionals, health information websites, medical advertisements, and individuals. Statistical differences were found between the uploading source groups in terms of reliability scores and global quality scores ( P <.001). In terms of total views, video length, duration, and comments, no statistical differences were indicated among the said groups. However, a statistical difference was noted between the useful and misleading information video groups with respect to the uploading sources ( P <.001). Conclusions A large number of Xigua videos pertaining to breast cancer contain misleading information. There is a need for accurate health information to be provided on Xigua Video and other social media; health care professionals should address this challenge.