File Download
There are no files associated with this item.
Links for fulltext
(May Require Subscription)
- Publisher Website: 10.1177/20552076231179053
- Scopus: eid_2-s2.0-85161292967
- WOS: WOS:001003768000001
- Find via
Supplementary
- Citations:
- Appears in Collections:
Article: Are dental x-rays safe? Content analysis of English and Chinese YouTube videos
Title | Are dental x-rays safe? Content analysis of English and Chinese YouTube videos |
---|---|
Authors | |
Keywords | ALARA health information internet media quality radiation safety YouTube |
Issue Date | 1-Jan-2023 |
Publisher | SAGE Publications |
Citation | Digital Health, 2023, v. 9 How to Cite? |
Abstract | ObjectiveThis study provided a content analysis of English and Chinese YouTube videos related to dental radiation safety. MethodThe search string, entered in English and Chinese respectively, was: (dental x-ray safe). The searches were performed and exported with Apify YouTube scraper. By screening the resultant videos and their related videos (as recommended by YouTube), a total of 89 videos were screened. Finally, 45 videos (36 English and nine Chinese) were included and analyzed. The specific information regarding dental radiation was evaluated. The Patient Education Material Assessment Tool for Audiovisual Materials was used to assess understandability and actionability. ResultsThere was no significant difference between the English and Chinese videos in terms of view count, like count, comment count, and video duration. Half of the videos explicitly reassured the audience that dental x-rays are safe. Two of the English videos specifically stated that dental x-rays do not cause cancers. Numerous analogies were made in regard to radiation dose, such as equivalence to taking a flight or eating some bananas. About 41.7% of the English videos and 33.3% of the Chinese videos mentioned that patients could be further protected from scatter radiation by wearing a lead apron and thyroid collar. Videos had a good understandability score (91.3) but a poor actionability score (0). ConclusionsSome of the analogies and the claimed radiation dose were questionable. One Chinese video even wrongly stated that dental x-rays are nonionizing radiation. The videos generally did not mention their information sources or the underlying radiation protection principles. |
Persistent Identifier | http://hdl.handle.net/10722/329043 |
ISSN | 2023 Impact Factor: 2.9 2023 SCImago Journal Rankings: 0.767 |
ISI Accession Number ID |
DC Field | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.author | Yeung, Andy Wai Kan | - |
dc.contributor.author | Parvanov, Emil D | - |
dc.contributor.author | Horbańczuk, Jarosław Olav | - |
dc.contributor.author | Kletecka-Pulker, Maria | - |
dc.contributor.author | Kimberger, Oliver | - |
dc.contributor.author | Willschke, Harald | - |
dc.contributor.author | Atanasov, Atanas G | - |
dc.date.accessioned | 2023-08-05T07:54:51Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2023-08-05T07:54:51Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 2023-01-01 | - |
dc.identifier.citation | Digital Health, 2023, v. 9 | - |
dc.identifier.issn | 2055-2076 | - |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10722/329043 | - |
dc.description.abstract | <h3>Objective</h3><p>This study provided a content analysis of English and Chinese YouTube videos related to dental radiation safety.</p><h3>Method</h3><p>The search string, entered in English and Chinese respectively, was: (dental x-ray safe). The searches were performed and exported with Apify YouTube scraper. By screening the resultant videos and their related videos (as recommended by YouTube), a total of 89 videos were screened. Finally, 45 videos (36 English and nine Chinese) were included and analyzed. The specific information regarding dental radiation was evaluated. The Patient Education Material Assessment Tool for Audiovisual Materials was used to assess understandability and actionability.</p><h3>Results</h3><p>There was no significant difference between the English and Chinese videos in terms of view count, like count, comment count, and video duration. Half of the videos explicitly reassured the audience that dental x-rays are safe. Two of the English videos specifically stated that dental x-rays do not cause cancers. Numerous analogies were made in regard to radiation dose, such as equivalence to taking a flight or eating some bananas. About 41.7% of the English videos and 33.3% of the Chinese videos mentioned that patients could be further protected from scatter radiation by wearing a lead apron and thyroid collar. Videos had a good understandability score (91.3) but a poor actionability score (0).</p><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Some of the analogies and the claimed radiation dose were questionable. One Chinese video even wrongly stated that dental x-rays are nonionizing radiation. The videos generally did not mention their information sources or the underlying radiation protection principles.</p> | - |
dc.language | eng | - |
dc.publisher | SAGE Publications | - |
dc.relation.ispartof | Digital Health | - |
dc.rights | This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. | - |
dc.subject | ALARA | - |
dc.subject | health | - |
dc.subject | information | - |
dc.subject | internet | - |
dc.subject | media | - |
dc.subject | quality | - |
dc.subject | radiation safety | - |
dc.subject | YouTube | - |
dc.title | Are dental x-rays safe? Content analysis of English and Chinese YouTube videos | - |
dc.type | Article | - |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1177/20552076231179053 | - |
dc.identifier.scopus | eid_2-s2.0-85161292967 | - |
dc.identifier.volume | 9 | - |
dc.identifier.eissn | 2055-2076 | - |
dc.identifier.isi | WOS:001003768000001 | - |
dc.identifier.issnl | 2055-2076 | - |