YouTube and the single-rod contraceptive implant

A content analysis

Jennifer Paul, Christy M Boraas, Mildred Duvet, Judy C. Chang

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

4 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background Since the internet has become an important source of contraceptive information with YouTube.com as the second most visited site, we analysed contraceptive implant YouTube videos for content and clinical accuracy. Methods Using the terms 'contraceptive implant', 'Nexplanon' and 'Implanon', the top 20 results on YouTube by relevance and view count were identified. After excluding duplicates, single-rod implant videos in English were included. Videos were classified as providing a professional or patient perspective. Views, duration and comments were noted. Videos were rated for reliability, global quality scale and whether they were positive or negative about the implant. Inter-rater agreement was measured. Results A total of 120 videos were retrieved; 52 were eligible for review. Less than 23% were professional videos; the majority reported patient experience (46% testimonials, 27% real-time procedure videos, 4% other). Patient videos had been posted a significantly longer duration of time than professional videos (364 vs 188 days, p=0.02), were less reliable (p≤0.0001) and were of lower global quality (p<0.0001). Some 61% of implant testimonial videos were rated as 'positive experiences' and inter-rater agreement was very good (κ =0.81). All testimonials mentioned side effects, commonly irregular bleeding and discomfort with insertion. A minority (26%) reported misinformation. Conclusions This study found that most of the information on YouTube pertaining to contraceptive implants is accurate, is presented from the patient's perspective, and promotes the method's use.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)195-200
Number of pages6
JournalJournal of Family Planning and Reproductive Health Care
Volume43
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 1 2017

Fingerprint

Contraceptive Agents
Internet
Communication
Hemorrhage
etonogestrel

Keywords

  • YouTube
  • contraceptive implant
  • family planning
  • social media

Cite this

YouTube and the single-rod contraceptive implant : A content analysis. / Paul, Jennifer; Boraas, Christy M; Duvet, Mildred; Chang, Judy C.

In: Journal of Family Planning and Reproductive Health Care, Vol. 43, No. 3, 01.07.2017, p. 195-200.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{78ffbe0dc2fa4a479f71e4015394e670,
title = "YouTube and the single-rod contraceptive implant: A content analysis",
abstract = "Background Since the internet has become an important source of contraceptive information with YouTube.com as the second most visited site, we analysed contraceptive implant YouTube videos for content and clinical accuracy. Methods Using the terms 'contraceptive implant', 'Nexplanon' and 'Implanon', the top 20 results on YouTube by relevance and view count were identified. After excluding duplicates, single-rod implant videos in English were included. Videos were classified as providing a professional or patient perspective. Views, duration and comments were noted. Videos were rated for reliability, global quality scale and whether they were positive or negative about the implant. Inter-rater agreement was measured. Results A total of 120 videos were retrieved; 52 were eligible for review. Less than 23{\%} were professional videos; the majority reported patient experience (46{\%} testimonials, 27{\%} real-time procedure videos, 4{\%} other). Patient videos had been posted a significantly longer duration of time than professional videos (364 vs 188 days, p=0.02), were less reliable (p≤0.0001) and were of lower global quality (p<0.0001). Some 61{\%} of implant testimonial videos were rated as 'positive experiences' and inter-rater agreement was very good (κ =0.81). All testimonials mentioned side effects, commonly irregular bleeding and discomfort with insertion. A minority (26{\%}) reported misinformation. Conclusions This study found that most of the information on YouTube pertaining to contraceptive implants is accurate, is presented from the patient's perspective, and promotes the method's use.",
keywords = "YouTube, contraceptive implant, family planning, social media",
author = "Jennifer Paul and Boraas, {Christy M} and Mildred Duvet and Chang, {Judy C.}",
year = "2017",
month = "7",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1136/jfprhc-2016-101593",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "43",
pages = "195--200",
journal = "BMJ Sexual and Reproductive Health",
issn = "2515-1991",
publisher = "BMJ Publishing Group",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - YouTube and the single-rod contraceptive implant

T2 - A content analysis

AU - Paul, Jennifer

AU - Boraas, Christy M

AU - Duvet, Mildred

AU - Chang, Judy C.

PY - 2017/7/1

Y1 - 2017/7/1

N2 - Background Since the internet has become an important source of contraceptive information with YouTube.com as the second most visited site, we analysed contraceptive implant YouTube videos for content and clinical accuracy. Methods Using the terms 'contraceptive implant', 'Nexplanon' and 'Implanon', the top 20 results on YouTube by relevance and view count were identified. After excluding duplicates, single-rod implant videos in English were included. Videos were classified as providing a professional or patient perspective. Views, duration and comments were noted. Videos were rated for reliability, global quality scale and whether they were positive or negative about the implant. Inter-rater agreement was measured. Results A total of 120 videos were retrieved; 52 were eligible for review. Less than 23% were professional videos; the majority reported patient experience (46% testimonials, 27% real-time procedure videos, 4% other). Patient videos had been posted a significantly longer duration of time than professional videos (364 vs 188 days, p=0.02), were less reliable (p≤0.0001) and were of lower global quality (p<0.0001). Some 61% of implant testimonial videos were rated as 'positive experiences' and inter-rater agreement was very good (κ =0.81). All testimonials mentioned side effects, commonly irregular bleeding and discomfort with insertion. A minority (26%) reported misinformation. Conclusions This study found that most of the information on YouTube pertaining to contraceptive implants is accurate, is presented from the patient's perspective, and promotes the method's use.

AB - Background Since the internet has become an important source of contraceptive information with YouTube.com as the second most visited site, we analysed contraceptive implant YouTube videos for content and clinical accuracy. Methods Using the terms 'contraceptive implant', 'Nexplanon' and 'Implanon', the top 20 results on YouTube by relevance and view count were identified. After excluding duplicates, single-rod implant videos in English were included. Videos were classified as providing a professional or patient perspective. Views, duration and comments were noted. Videos were rated for reliability, global quality scale and whether they were positive or negative about the implant. Inter-rater agreement was measured. Results A total of 120 videos were retrieved; 52 were eligible for review. Less than 23% were professional videos; the majority reported patient experience (46% testimonials, 27% real-time procedure videos, 4% other). Patient videos had been posted a significantly longer duration of time than professional videos (364 vs 188 days, p=0.02), were less reliable (p≤0.0001) and were of lower global quality (p<0.0001). Some 61% of implant testimonial videos were rated as 'positive experiences' and inter-rater agreement was very good (κ =0.81). All testimonials mentioned side effects, commonly irregular bleeding and discomfort with insertion. A minority (26%) reported misinformation. Conclusions This study found that most of the information on YouTube pertaining to contraceptive implants is accurate, is presented from the patient's perspective, and promotes the method's use.

KW - YouTube

KW - contraceptive implant

KW - family planning

KW - social media

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85021701404&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85021701404&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1136/jfprhc-2016-101593

DO - 10.1136/jfprhc-2016-101593

M3 - Article

VL - 43

SP - 195

EP - 200

JO - BMJ Sexual and Reproductive Health

JF - BMJ Sexual and Reproductive Health

SN - 2515-1991

IS - 3

ER -