Balance, Dynamic Balance
Conditions
Keywords
balance, video, youtube
Brief summary
This study aimed to find out how useful and trustworthy YouTube videos are when it comes to teaching dynamic balance exercises. Researchers watched and analyzed selected videos to check the accuracy of the information, how reliable the sources were, and how well the videos were made to help viewers learn. The goal was to help people find better-quality videos for safe and effective balance training.
Interventions
OTHERAn Evaluation of the Quality and Informational Content of Balance Exercise Training Videos Published on YouTube.
In the study, there will be no participant groups; YouTube videos searched using the keyword balance exercise will be evaluated based on specific criteria.
Sponsors
Nigde Omer Halisdemir University
Study design
Observational model
OTHER
Time perspective
CROSS_SECTIONAL
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
No minimum to 80 Years
Healthy volunteers
Yes
Inclusion criteria
* Videos retrieved using the keyword dynamic balance exercise * Videos in English * Presence of audio narration or explanation * Demonstration of exercise practices within the video content
Exclusion criteria
* Duplicate videos (i.e., videos with identical or highly similar content) * Videos with unclear or unintelligible audio and/or visual content
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Quality of videos | From registration until the end of the second week | The DISCERN tool is a standardized questionnaire developed to enable researchers to systematically evaluate the quality of health information related to treatment options. The instrument comprises 15 specific items followed by an overall assessment question aimed at rating the general quality of the information provided |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Quality of videos 2 | From registration until the end of the second week | The overall quality of each video was evaluated using the 5-point Global Quality Scale (GQS), a widely used instrument for assessing the comprehensiveness and clarity of health information. According to the rating criteria, videos receiving a score of 1 or 2 were classified as low quality, a score of 3 as moderate quality, and scores of 4 or 5 as indicative of high quality. |
Other
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Video popularity | From registration until the end of the second week | Video popularity was quantitatively assessed using two validated metrics: the Video Power Index (VPI), calculated as the ratio of likes to the total number of likes and dislikes multiplied by 100 (likes/(likes+dislikes))×100 and the View Ratio (VR), defined as the number of views divided by the number of days since the video was uploaded (views/day) |
Countries
Turkey (Türkiye)
Outcome results
None listed