Table 5.
Analysis of informative videos (N = 71) according to source.
| Parameter | News agency | Government Agency |
Independent | Health information Website |
Internet video channels |
P Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Views | 6487 (349 – 510,808) | 17,272 (355 – 26,098) | 50,584 (139 – 719,768) | 12,163 (1413 – 58,782) | 42,284 (743 – 526,719) | 0.11 |
| Likes | 36 (0 – 5000) | 54 (14 – 138) | 663 (0 – 15,844) | 170 (22 – 2127) | 273 (6 – 14,000) | < 0.01 |
| Dislikes | 8 (0 – 196) | 2 (1 – 31) | 21 (0 – 440) | 3 (0 – 83) | 12 (0 – 159) | 0.1 |
| Shares | 40 (0 – 2626) | 93.5 (5 – 455) | 340 (1 – 2574) | 130 (0 – 1184) | 193 (0 – 2450) | < 0.05 |
| Comments | 34 (0 – 1164) | 8 (1 – 95) | 100 (0 – 1743) | 41 (1 – 473) | 164 (1 – 958) | < 0.05 |
| Days in YouTube | 302 (186 – 319) | 201.5 (188 – 394) | 295 (187 – 336) | 293 (193 – 307) | 304 (187 – 322) | 0.75 |
| Popularity | 32.48 (1.43 – 1669.3) | 72.4 (1.89 – 92.39) | 174.1 (0.74 – 2617.6) | 39.62 (5.16 – 216.91) | 134.26 (3.95 – 1761.6) | 0.11 |
| Video length, min | 2.08 (0.23 – 38.92) | 3.16 (0.98 – 9.87) | 5.72 (0.75 – 37.25) | 6.93 (2.7 – 27.65) | 1.52 (0.87 – 6.05) | < 0.01 |
| GQS | 2 (1 – 4) | 3.5 (2 – 5) | 3 (2 – 4) | 4 (2 – 5) | 2 (1 – 4) | < 0.05 |
| No. of videos (% total) | 31 (43.66) | 4 (5.63) | 15 (21.13) | 7 (9.86) | 12 (16.9) | – |
| Total views (% total) | 1,178,117 (20.82) | 60,997 (1.08) | 2,450,853 (43.3) | 144,702 (2.56) | 1,372,955 (24.28) | – |
| Total likes (% total) | 9447 (11.2) | 260 (0.31) | 40,924 (48.52) | 3857 (4.57) | 29,837 (35.37) | – |
| Total dislikes (% total) | 639 (24.29) | 36 (1.37) | 1213 (46.12) | 136 (5.17) | 602 (22.89) | – |
| Total shares (% total) | 6032 (26.08) | 647 (2.79) | 8276 (35.78) | 2201 (9.52) | 5852 (25.29) | – |
| Reliability score | 2 (0 – 5) | 3.5 (2 – 4) | 3 (0 – 5) | 3 (1 – 5) | 2 (0 – 4) | < 0.05 |
| Aims clear andachieved? | 24 (77.42) | 4 (100) | 13 (86.67) | 7 (100) | 7 (58.33) | – |
| Reliable informationsource? | 20 (64.52) | 4 (100) | 11 (73.33) | 4 (57.14) | 7 (58.33) | – |
| Balanced andunbiased? | 6 (19.36) | 2 (50) | 10 (66.67) | 5 (71.43) | 4 (33.33) | – |
| Additionalreferences? | 5 (16.13) | 1 (25) | 7 (46.67) | 4 (57.14) | 3 (25) | – |
| Uncertain areasmentioned? | 6 (19.36) | 2 (50) | 5 (33.33) | 1 (14.29) | 4 (33.33) | – |
Abbreviations: GQS, Global Quality Scale. Values expressed as median (range) or count (%). Comparisons of parameters across different types of sources were performed by Kruskal-Wallis test. Two videos (academic institution/university = 1, for-profit company = 1) were not included in the analysis due to the very small sample size.