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:

The spreading information of YouTube videos on Phosphodiesterase 5 inhibitors: a worrisome picture from one of the most consulted internet source

International Journal of Impotence Research (2023)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Several previous studies on YouTubeTM information on medical topics have already been published. The current study aimed to evaluate the quality information of YouTubeTM videos on Phosphodiesterase 5 inhibitors (PDE5-is). A systematic search on YouTube™ was conducted using 30 keyword combinations. For each keyword’s combination, the first 50 videos were recorded. The quality of videos on YouTube™ was assessed with Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool for audio‐visual content (PEMAT A/V), DISCERN score and a specified created Misinformation tool. According to the selection criteria, 229 YouTube™ videos were suitable for the analyses. Videos were stratified according to the five main identified topics: sildenafil [n = 98; 42.79%] vs tadalafil [n = 50; 21.83%] vs vardenafil [n = 44;19.21%] vs avanafil [n = 17; 7.42%] vs PDE5-is in general [n = 20; 8.73%]. The median overall PEMAT A/V Understandability score and Actionability score were 55% (interquartile range [IQR]: 42–75) and 0% (IQR = 0–67), respectively. Specifically, according to our stratification, YouTube Videos on avanafil reached higher values of both Understandability and Actionability (72.7% and 66.7, respectively) in contrast to other categories. According to DISCERN tool, the total overall median score was 29.5 (IQR = 18–41). According to Misinformation scale, the item 1 (‘sexual stimulation’) harboured an overall median score of 2 (IQR = 1–2); the item 2 (‘side effects’) an overall median score of 2 (IQR = 1–3); the item 3 (‘treatment choices’) an overall median score of 1 (IQR = 1–2); the item 4 (‘contraindications’) an overall median score of 2 (IQR = 1–2). YouTube™ is a fast and open-access source for mass information. The overall quality of the PDE5-is contents provided is sadly unsatisfactory. Nowadays, YouTube™ cannot be recommended as a reliable source of information on PDE5-is.

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 flowchart.
Fig. 2: Box and whiskers plots depicting Understandability, Actionability and DISCERN total score according to the video topic (sildenafil vs tadalafil vs vardenafil vs avanafil vs PDE5-is in general).
Fig. 3: Box and whiskers plots depicting Misinformation items scores according to the video topic (sildenafil vs tadalafil vs vardenafil vs avanafil vs PDE5-is in general).

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

Data and materials are available from the corresponding authors under reasonable request.

Code availability

Code is available from the corresponding authors under reasonable request.

References

  1. Salonia A, Bettocchi C, Boeri L, Capogrosso P, Carvalho J, Cilesiz NC, et al. European Association of Urology Guidelines on Sexual and Reproductive Health-2021 Update: Male Sexual Dysfunction. Eur Urol. 2021;80:333–57.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. EMA. European Medicines Agency. European Medicines Agency. https://www.ema.europa.eu/en. Accessed April 16, 2023.

  3. Mirone V, Gentile V, Zizzo G, Terry M, Longo N, Fusco F, et al. Did men with erectile dysfunction discuss their condition with partner and physicians? A survey of men attending a free call information service. Int J Impot Res. 2002;14:256–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Lafortune D, Girard M, Dussault É, Philibert M, Hébert M, Boislard MA, et al. Who seeks sex therapy? Sexual dysfunction prevalence and correlates, and help-seeking among clinical and community samples. PLoS One. 2023;18:e0282618.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Capogrosso P, Ventimiglia E, Boeri L, Cazzaniga W, Chierigo F, Pederzoli F, et al. Age at first presentation for erectile dysfunction: analysis of changes over a 12-yr period. Eur Urol Focus. 2019;5:899–905.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Feldman HA, Goldstein I, Hatzichristou DG, Krane RJ, McKinlay JB. Impotence and its medical and psychosocial correlates: results of the Massachusetts Male Aging Study. J Urol. 1994;151:54–61.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Braun M, Wassmer G, Klotz T, Reifenrath B, Mathers M, Engelmann U. Epidemiology of erectile dysfunction: results of the “Cologne Male Survey”. Int J Impot Res. 2000;12:305–11.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Johannes CB, Araujo AB, Feldman HA, Derby CA, Kleinman KP, McKinlay JB. Incidence of erectile dysfunction in men 40 to 69 years old: longitudinal results from the Massachusetts male aging study. J Urol. 2000;163:460–3.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Schouten BWV, Bosch JLHR, Bernsen RMD, Blanker MH, Thomas S, Bohnen AM. Incidence rates of erectile dysfunction in the Dutch general population. Effects of definition, clinical relevance and duration of follow-up in the Krimpen Study. Int J Impot Res. 2005;17:58–62.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Attia AAA, Abdel-Hameed AKS, Amer MAEM, Mamdouh H, GamalEl Din SF. El-Moslemany HEDGM. Study of the prevalence and patterns of phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitor use among sexually active Egyptian males: a national cross-sectional survey. Andrologia. 2019;51:e13364.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Tyrawski J, DeAndrea DC. Pharmaceutical companies and their drugs on social media: a content analysis of drug information on popular social media sites. J Med Internet Res. 2015;17:e130.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Bujnowska-Fedak MM, Waligóra J, Mastalerz-Migas A. The internet as a source of health information and services. Adv Exp Med Biol. 2019;1211:1–16.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Mirone V, Abate M, Fusco GM, Cirillo L, Napolitano L, Morra S, et al. Telemedicine and YouTubeTM: video quality analysis before and after COVID-19 pandemic. Arch Ital Urol Androl. 2023;95:11341.

  14. Gul M, Diri MA. YouTube as a source of information about premature ejaculation treatment. J Sex Med. 2019;16:1734–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Toprak T, Yilmaz M, Ramazanoglu MA, Verit A, Schlager D, Miernik A. YouTube is inadequate as an information source on delayed ejaculation. Int J Impot Res. 2022;35:392–7.

  16. Baydilli N, Selvi I. Is social media reliable as a source of information on Peyronie’s disease treatment? Int J Impot Res. 2022;34:295–301.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Morra S, Napolitano L, Collà Ruvolo C, Celentano G, La Rocca R, Capece M, et al. Could YouTubeTM encourage men on prostate checks? A contemporary analysis. Arch Ital Urol Androl. 2022;94:285–90.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. 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. 2022;54:e14246.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. 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 

  20. DISCERN – The DISCERN Instrument. http://www.discern.org.uk/discern_instrument.php. Accessed April 16, 2023.

  21. Burnett AL, Nehra A, Breau RH, Culkin DJ, Faraday MM, Hakim LS, et al. Erectile dysfunction: AUA Guideline. J Urol. 2018;200:633–41.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Goldstein I, Lue TF, Padma-Nathan H, Rosen RC, Steers WD, Wicker PA. Oral sildenafil in the treatment of erectile dysfunction. Sildenafil Study Group. N Engl J Med. 1998;338:1397–404.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Bechara A, Casabé A, De Bonis W, Helien A, Bertolino MV. Recreational use of phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors by healthy young men. J Sex Med. 2010;7:3736–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Aldridge J, Measham F. Sildenafil (Viagra) is used as a recreational drug in England. BMJ. 1999;318:669.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Seidu S, Cebrián A, Kunutsor SK, Khunti K. Erectile dysfunction, phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitor use and risk of cardiovascular disease and mortality in people with diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Prim Care Diabetes. 2022;16:601–13.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Cilio S, Pozzi E, Fallara G, Belladelli F, Corsini C, d’Arma A, et al. Premature ejaculation among men with erectile dysfunction-findings from a real-life cross-sectional study. Int J Impot Res. 2022. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41443-022-00601-4. Epub ahead of print.

  29. Pozzi E, Capogrosso P, Boeri L, Cazzaniga W, Matloob R, Ventimiglia E, et al. Trends in reported male sexual dysfunction over the past decade: an evolving landscape. Int J Impot Res. 2021;33:596–602.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Cilio S, Collà Ruvolo C, Turco C, Creta M, Capece M, La Rocca R, et al. Analysis of quality information provided by “Dr. YouTubeTM” on Phimosis. Int J Impot Res. 2023;35:398–403.

  31. Turco C, Collà Ruvolo C, Cilio S, Celentano G, Califano G, Creta M, et al. Looking for cystoscopy on YouTube: are videos a reliable information tool for internet users? Arch Ital Urol Androl. 2022;94:57–61.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Melchionna A, Collà Ruvolo C, Capece M, La Rocca R, Celentano G, Califano G, et al. Testicular pain and YouTubeTM: are uploaded videos a reliable source to get information? Int J Impot Res. 2023;35:140–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Di Bello F, Collà Ruvolo C, Cilio S, La Rocca R, Capece M, Creta M, et al. Testicular cancer and YouTube: what do you expect from a social media platform? Int J Urol J. 2022;29:685–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

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

    Gabriele Pezone, Claudia Collà Ruvolo, Simone Cilio, Agostino Fraia, Ernesto Di Mauro, Gianluigi Califano, Francesco Passaro, Massimiliano Creta, Marco Capece, Roberto La Rocca, Giuseppe Celentano, Simone Morra, Francesco Di Bello, Alessandro Palmieri, Ciro Imbimbo & Nicola Longo

Authors
  1. Gabriele Pezone
    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. Simone Cilio
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Agostino Fraia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Ernesto Di Mauro
    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. Francesco Passaro
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Massimiliano Creta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Marco Capece
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Roberto La Rocca
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Giuseppe Celentano
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Simone Morra
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  13. Francesco Di Bello
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  14. Alessandro Palmieri
    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

  16. Nicola Longo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Conception and design of the study: GP, SC, CCR, MCr, RLR, GCal. Data acquisition: GP, AF, EDM, FP. Analysis and interpretation of data: CCR, SM, MCap. Drafting the manuscript: FDB, AP, CI. Style revision: GCel, NL. All authors revised the manuscript and read and approved the version submitted.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Simone Cilio.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

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

Supplementary information

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Pezone, G., Collà Ruvolo, C., Cilio, S. et al. The spreading information of YouTube videos on Phosphodiesterase 5 inhibitors: a worrisome picture from one of the most consulted internet source. Int J Impot Res (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41443-023-00762-w

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41443-023-00762-w

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links