SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Sağlık Bilimlerinde İleri Araştırmalar Dergisi / 2026 / Volume: 5 Issue: 3

YOUTUBE AS A SOURCE OF INFORMATION ON PORCELAIN LAMINATE VENEERS

PORSELEN LAMİNAT KAPLAMA HAKKINDA BİLGİ KAYNAĞI OLARAK YOUTUBE

Pınar Naiboğlu(GIRESUN UNIVERSITY, FACULTY OF DENTISTRY, DEPARTMENT OF CLINICAL SCIENCES (FACULTY OF DENTISTRY), DEPARTMENT OF DENTAL DISEASES AND TREATMENT OF DENTAL DISEASES)0000-0001-7440-0320
Sevde Göksel(SERBEST DİŞ HEKİMİ)0000-0003-0092-7079
Gül Aykanat(BİRUNİ ÜNİVERSİTESİ, DİŞ HEKİMLİĞİ FAKÜLTESİ, KLİNİK BİLİMLER BÖLÜMÜ, PROTETİK DİŞ TEDAVİSİ ANABİLİM DALI)0000-0002-9801-9871
Pages
—
Publication Date
2022-11-16
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

It was found that the length of the video and the number of comments were significantly higher in the excellent videos than in poor videos (p=.030 and p=.019, respectively).

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective of work: This study aimed to evaluate the content and usefulness of YouTube videos on porcelain laminate veneers.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The first 200 videos were scanned.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:It was found that the length of the video and the number of comments were significantly higher in the excellent videos than in poor videos (p=.030 and p=.019, respectively).
🔬Design:Clinical Research
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:dental porcelain · dental veneers · information resources

Abstract

Objective of work: This study aimed to evaluate the content and usefulness of YouTube videos on porcelain laminate veneers. Materials and Methods: The keyword porcelain laminate veneer was searched on YouTube. The first 200 videos were scanned. After exclusions, 79 videos were assessed for the content presented in 8 topic titles for porcelain laminate veneers. Videos were classified as poor (0), moderate (1), and excellent (2) based on the usefulness score. A general video assessment included length of the video, number of views, comments, likes, dislikes, and days since upload was completed. Videos were categorized according to their type: educational, patient’s experience, and scientifically erroneous. The source of the uploaded videos was classified into three groups: professionals (dentist, specialist), health companies, and individual users. Data were analyzed with the Kruskal-Wallis, Post hoc- Dunn, and chi-square tests (p ˂ .05). Results: The average usefulness score was 0.544. It was found that the length of the video and the number of comments were significantly higher in the excellent videos than in poor videos (p=.030 and p=.019, respectively). There was no significant difference between the usefulness score and the source of upload (p=.426) or the type of video (p=.819). The most discussed topic title was procedures of porcelain laminate veneer (32.86%), while the least discussed topic title was contraindications (3.81%). Conclusion: YouTube appears to be an incomplete source of information about porcelain laminate veneers for patients.

Özet

Amaç: Porselen laminate veneer üzerine YouTube videolarının içeriğini ve yararlılığını değerlendirmek. Gereç ve Yöntemler: YouTube’da “porselen laminate veneer” anahtar kelimesi arandı. İlk 200 video tarandı. Hariç tutulanlardan sonra, 79 video, içeriğin yararlılığı açısından iki araştırmacı tarafından analiz edildi. Videolarda, porselen laminate veneer 8 konu başlığında değerlendirildi. Videolar, yararlılık puanına göre zayıf (0), orta (1) ve mükemmel (2) olarak sınıflandırıldı. Genel video değerlendirmesi, videonun uzunluğunu, görüntüleme yorum, beğenme, beğenmeme ve yüklemeden bu yana geçen gün sayılarını içeriyordu. Videolar türlerine göre eğitici, hasta deneyimi ve bilimsel olarak hatalı olarak kategorilere ayrıldı. Videolar yüklenme kaynaklarına göre profesyoneller (diş hekimi, uzman), sağlık şirketleri ve bireysel kullanıcılar olarak üç gruba ayrıldı. Veriler Kruskal-Wallis testi, Posthoc-Dunn testi ve ki-kare testi ile analiz edildi (p˂0,05). Bulgular: Ortalama yararlılık puanı 0,544’idi. Mükemmel yararlılık puanına sahip videolarda video uzunluğunun ve yorum sayısının zayıf yararlılık puanına sahip videolara göre anlamlı derecede yüksek olduğu bulundu (sırasıyla p=0,030 ve p=0,019). Yararlılık puanı ile yükleme kaynağı (p= 0,426), video türü (p=0,819) arasında anlamlı bir fark yoktu. En çok tartışılan konu başlığı porselen laminate veneer prosedürleriydi (%32,86). En az tartışılan konu başlığı ise kontrendikasyonlar oldu (%3,81). Sonuç: YouTube, porselen laminate veneer hakkında hastalar için yetersiz bir bilgi kaynağı olarak görünmektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Naiboğlu, P., Göksel, S., Aykanat, G., *, S. G. (2022). YOUTUBE AS A SOURCE OF INFORMATION ON PORCELAIN LAMINATE VENEERS. Sağlık Bilimlerinde İleri Araştırmalar Dergisi, Volume: 5 Issue: 3. https://doi.org/10.26650/JARHS2022-1163393

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (21)

  1. Peumans M, Van Meerbeek B, Lambrechts P, Vanherle G. Porcelain veneers: a review of the literature. J Dent 2000;28(3):163-77. google scholar
  2. Akoğlu B, Gemalmaz D. Fracture resistance of ceramic veneers with different preparation designs. J Prosthodont 2011;20(5):380-4. google scholar
  3. Fradeani M, Redemagni M, Corrado M. Porcelain laminate veneers: 6- to 12-year clinical evaluation--a retrospective study. İnt J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2005;25(1):9-17. google scholar
  4. Calamia JR, Calamia CS. Porcelain laminate veneers: reasons for 25 years of success. Dent Clin North Am 2007;51(2):399-417. google scholar
  5. Burke FJT. Survival rates for porcelain laminate veneers with special reference to the effect of preparation in dentin: a literature review. J Esthet Restor Dent 2012;24(4):257-65. google scholar
  6. Hassona Y, Taimeh D, Marahleh A, Scully C. YouTube as a source of information on mouth (oral) cancer. Oral Dis 2016;22(3):202-8. google scholar
  7. Madathil KC, Rivera-Rodriguez AJ, Greenstein JS, Gramopadhye AK. Healthcare information on YouTube: a systematic review. Health İnformatics J 2015;21(3):173-94. google scholar
  8. Keelan J, Pavri-Garcia V, Tomlinson G, Wilson K. YouTube as a source of information on immunization: a content analysis. JAMA 2007;298(21):2482-4. google scholar
  9. Dias da Silva MA, Pereira AC, Walmsley AD. Who is providing dental education content via YouTube? Br Dent J 2019;226(6):437-40. google scholar
  10. Desai T, Shariff A, Dhingra V, Minhas D, Eure M, Kats M. İs content really king? An objective analysis of the public’s response to medical videos on YouTube. PLoS One 2013;8(12):e82469. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0082469. google scholar
  11. Steinberg PL, Wason S, Stern JM, Deters L, Kowal B, Seigne J. YouTube as source of prostate cancer information. Urology 2010;75(3):619-22. google scholar
  12. Gaş S, Zincir ÖÖ, Bozkurt AP. Are YouTube videos useful for patients interested in botulinum toxin for bruxism? J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2019;77(9):1776-83. google scholar
  13. Lena Y, Dindaroğlu F. Lingual orthodontic treatment: a YouTube video analysis. Angle Orthod 2018;88(2):208-14. google scholar
  14. Biggs TC, Bird JH, Harries PG, Salib RJ. YouTube as a source of information on rhinosinusitis: the good, the bad and the ugly. J Laryngol Otol 2013;127(8):749-54. google scholar
  15. Strychowsky JE, Nayan S, Farrokhyar F, MacLean J. YouTube: a good source of information on pediatric tonsillectomy? İnt J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 2013;77(6):972-5. google scholar
  16. Hegarty E, Campbell C, Grammatopoulos E, DiBiase AT, Sherriff M, Cobourne MT. YouTube™ as an information resource for orthognathic surgery. J Orthod 2017;44(2):90-6. google scholar
  17. Menziletoglu D, Guler AY, İsik BK. Are YouTube videos related to dental implant useful for patient education? J Stomatol Oral Maxillofac Surg 2020;121(6):661-4. google scholar
  18. Ajumobi AB, Malakouti M, Bullen A, Ahaneku H, Lunsford TN. YouTube™ as a source of instructional videos on bowel preparation: a content analysis. J Cancer Educ 2016;31(4):755-9. google scholar
  19. Delli K, Livas C, Vissink A, Spijkervet FKL. İs YouTube useful as a source of information for Sjögren’s syndrome? Oral Dis 2016;22(3):196-201. google scholar
  20. Kumar N, Pandey A, Venkatraman A, Garg N. Are video sharing web sites a useful source of information on hypertension? J Am Soc Hypertens 2014;8(7):481-90. google scholar
  21. Gabarron E, Larbi D, Dorronzoro E, Hasvold PE, Wynn R, Årsand E. Factors engaging users of diabetes social media channels on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram: observational study. J Med Internet Res, 2020;22(9):e21204. doi: 10.2196/21204. google scholar