Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Article
  • Published:

Testicular pain and youtube™: are uploaded videos a reliable source to get information?

International Journal of Impotence Research volume 35, pages 140–146 (2023)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Several previous studies on YouTube™ on urological field have already been published. The aim of the current study was to evaluate the quality information of YouTubeTM videos on testicular pain. Using Google Trends tool, the frequency of worldwide YouTubeTM and Google Search on testicular pain was examined from 2010 to 2020. The keywords “testicular pain”, “testicular ache” and “scrotal pain” were used on the YouTube platform and the first 100 YouTubeTM videos were analyzed for each one. The Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT) for Audiovisual (A/V) Materials, the DISCERN score and Misinformation tool were used to assess video quality. According to YouTube™ Search the mean relative frequency search for “testicular pain” ranged from 10.5 to 30.0%. According to GoogleTM Search it ranged from 73.7 to 91.0%, Of all 300 videos, 117 were eligible for the analysis. The median number of views, thumbs-up and thumbs-down was respectively: 47060 (interquartile range [IQR] = 6297.0–144188.0), 289 (IQR = 40–912) and 19 (IQR = 4–53). Of all videos, 68.4% and 31.6% were produced respectively by Medical Doctors and Other. The median PEMAT Actionability and Understandability scores were 66.7% and 66.7%, respectively. The median DISCERN score ranged from 1 to 5, with an overall median score of 3, defined from question 16. The median misinformation score ranged from 2 to 5. In conclusion, an increased interest on testicular pain was recorded on both YouTubeTM and Google search during the last decade. However, according to the quality assessment tools used, YouTube™ users cannot get trustful and exhaustive information on testicular pain. Therefore, authors with/without medical background should improve the quality of information on YouTube™ videos.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: PRISMA diagram.
Fig. 2: Google trends.

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

Data and materials are available whenever requested.

Code availability

Code is available whenever requested.

References

  1. Gordhan CG, Sadeghi-Nejad H. Scrotal pain: evaluation and management. Korean J Urol. 2015;56:3–11. https://doi.org/10.4111/kju.2015.56.1.3.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Granitsiotis P, Kirk D. Chronic testicular pain: an overview. Eur Urol. 2004;45:430–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2003.11.004.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Leslie SW, Sajjad H, Siref LE, Chronic testicular pain and orchalgia. StatPearls. StatPearls Publishing; 2021. Accessed 30 Dec 2021. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK482481/.

  4. Tojuola B, Layman J, Kartal I, Gudelogul A, Brahmbhatt J, Parekattil S. Chronic orchialgia: review of treatments old and new. Indian J Urol . 2016;32:21–6. https://doi.org/10.4103/0970-1591.173110.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Fox S. The Social Life of Health Information, 201:45. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/01/15/the-social-life-of-health-information/.

  6. YouTube for Press. Accessed 8 Mar 2021. https://blog.youtube/press.

  7. Hansen C, Interrante JD, Ailes EC, Frey MT, Broussard CS, Godoshian VJ, et al. Assessment of YouTube videos as a source of information on medication use in pregnancy. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2016;25:35–44. https://doi.org/10.1002/pds.3911.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Steinberg PL, Wason S, Stern JM, Deters L, Kowal B, Seigne J. YouTube as source of prostate cancer information. Urology 2010;75:619–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2008.07.059.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Sood A, Sarangi S, Pandey A, Murugiah K. YouTube as a source of information on kidney stone disease. Urology. 2011;77:558–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2010.07.536.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Schlichthorst M, Sanci LA, Pirkis J, Spittal MJ, Hocking JS. Why do men go to the doctor? Socio-demographic and lifestyle factors associated with healthcare utilisation among a cohort of Australian men. BMC Public Health 2016;16:1028 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-016-3706-5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. MacDonald C, Burton M, Carachi R, O’Toole S. Why adolescents delay with presentation to hospital with acute testicular pain: A qualitative study. J Pediatr Surg. 2021;56:614–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2020.06.041.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Arslan B, Gönültaş S, Gökmen E, Özman O, Onuk Ö, Yazıcı G, et al. Does YouTube include high-quality resources for training on laparoscopic and robotic radical prostatectomy? World J Urol. 2020;38:1195–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-019-02904-6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Gul M, Diri MA. YouTube as a Source of Information About premature ejaculation treatment. J Sex Med. 2019;16:1734–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsxm.2019.08.008.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Loeb S, Sengupta S, Butaney M, Macaluso JN Jr, Czarniecki SW, Robbins R, et al. Dissemination of misinformative and biased information about prostate cancer on YouTube. Eur Urol. 2019;75:564–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2018.10.056.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Ozkent MS, Böcü K, Altintas E, Gul M, Correlation between Twitter mentions and academic citations in sexual medicine journals. Int J Impot Res. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41443-021-00457-0.

  16. Baydilli N, Selvi I, Is social media reliable as a source of information on Peyronie’s disease treatment? Int J Impot Res. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41443-021-00454-3.

  17. Hanna K, Arthur M, Welliver C, Erectile dysfunction and prostate diseases are the predominant Google search terms amongst men’s health topics. Int J Impot Res. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41443-021-00448-1.

  18. Morra S, Collà Ruvolo C, Napolitano L, La Rocca R, Celentano G, Califano G, et al. YouTubeTM as a source of information on bladder pain syndrome: A contemporary analysis. Neurourol Urodyn. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1002/nau.24802.

  19. Capece M, Di Giovanni A, Cirigliano L, Napolitano L, La Rocca R, Creta M, et al. YouTube as a source of information on penile prosthesis. Andrologia. 2021:e14246. https://doi.org/10.1111/and.14246.

  20. Kumar N, Pandey A, Venkatraman A, Garg N. Are video sharing websites a useful source of information on hypertension? J Am Soc Hypertens. 2014;8:481–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jash.2014.05.001.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Garg N, Venkatraman A, Pandey A, Kumar N. YouTube as a source of information on dialysis: a content analysis. Nephrology. 2015;20:315–20. https://doi.org/10.1111/nep.12397.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Brooks FM, Lawrence H, Jones A, McCarthy MJ. YouTube™ as a source of patient information for lumbar discectomy. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2014;96:144–6. https://doi.org/10.1308/003588414X13814021676396.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Gerundo G, Collà Ruvolo C, Puzone B, et al. Personal protective equipment in Covid-19: Evidence-based quality and analysis of YouTube videos after one year of pandemic. Am J Infect Control. Published online November 26,2021:S0196-6553(21)00758 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajic.2021.11.013.

  24. Google Trends. Google Trends. Accessed 30 Dec 2021. https://trends.google.it/trends/?geo=IT.

  25. Megaly M, Khalil C, Tadros B, Tawadros M, Evaluation of educational value of YouTube videos for patients with coeliac disease. Int J Celiac Dis. https://doi.org/10.12691/ijcd-4-3-9. Available online at http://pubs.sciepub.com/ijcd/4/3/9.

  26. Shoemaker SJ, Wolf MS, Brach C. Development of the Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT): a new measure of understandability and actionability for print and audiovisual patient information. Patient Educ Couns. 2014;96:395–403.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Charnock D, University of Oxford, British Library. The DISCERN handbook: quality criteria for consumer health information on treatment choices. Abingdon: Radcliffe Medical; 1998. https://archive.org/details/discernhandbookq0000unse.

  28. McHugh ML. Interrater reliability: the kappa statistic. Biochem Med. 2012;22:276–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics. 1977;33:159–74.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Neurosciences, Sciences and Odontostomatology, Urology Unit, University of Naples “Federico II”, Napoli, Italy

    Alberto Melchionna, Claudia Collà Ruvolo, Marco Capece, Roberto La Rocca, Giuseppe Celentano, Gianluigi Califano, Massimiliano Creta, Luigi Napolitano, Simone Morra, Simone Cilio, Carmine Turco, Vincenzo Caputo, Nicola Longo, Vincenzo Mirone & Ciro Imbimbo

Authors
  1. Alberto Melchionna
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Claudia Collà Ruvolo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Marco Capece
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Roberto La Rocca
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Giuseppe Celentano
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Gianluigi Califano
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Massimiliano Creta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Luigi Napolitano
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Simone Morra
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Simone Cilio
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Carmine Turco
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Vincenzo Caputo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  13. Nicola Longo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  14. Vincenzo Mirone
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  15. Ciro Imbimbo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

AM: conceptualization, writing original draft preparation. CCR: data analyses, data curation, writing original draft preparation. MCa: methodology. RLR: writing and editing. GCe: conceptualization. GCa: writing original draft preparation. MCr: methodology. LN: writing and editing. SM: conceptualization. SC: conceptualization. CT: writing original draft preparation. VC: data curation, NL: writing review and editing. VM: validation. CI: validation

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Claudia Collà Ruvolo.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Ethics statement

The paper is exempt from ethical committee approval.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Melchionna, A., Collà Ruvolo, C., Capece, M. et al. Testicular pain and youtube™: are uploaded videos a reliable source to get information?. Int J Impot Res 35, 140–146 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41443-022-00536-w

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41443-022-00536-w

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links