METHODS: ClinicalTrials.gov was searched for all randomized, interventional, phase II-IV trials that were registered between 1 January 2000 and 31 December 2009 and included adults with Alzheimer's disease, motor neurone disease, multiple sclerosis or Parkinson's disease. Publications from these trials were identified by extensive online searching and contact with authors, and multiple logistic regression analysis was performed to identify characteristics associated with trial discontinuation and non-publication.
RESULTS: In all, 362 eligible trials were identified, of which 12% (42/362) were discontinued. 28% (91/320) of completed trials remained unpublished after 5 years. Trial discontinuation was independently associated with number of patients (P = 0.015; more likely in trials with ≤100 patients; odds ratio 2.65, 95% confidence interval 1.21-5.78) and phase of trial (P = 0.009; more likely in phase IV than phase III trials; odds ratio 3.90, 95% confidence interval 1.41-10.83). Trial non-publication was independently associated with blinding status (P = 0.005; more likely in single-blind than double-blind trials; odds ratio 5.63, 95% confidence interval 1.70-18.71), number of centres (P = 0.010; more likely in single-centre than multi-centre trials; odds ratio 2.49, 95% confidence interval 1.25-4.99), phase of trial (P = 0.041; more likely in phase II than phase IV trials; odds ratio 2.88, 95% confidence interval 1.04-7.93) and sponsor category (P = 0.001; more likely in industry-sponsored than university-sponsored trials; odds ratio 5.05, 95% confidence interval 1.87-13.63).
CONCLUSIONS: There is evidence of non-dissemination bias in randomized trials of interventions for neurodegenerative diseases. Associations with trial discontinuation and non-publication were similar to findings in other diseases. These biases may distort the therapeutic information available to inform clinical practice.
Objective: To analyze the video sources, contents and quality of YouTube videos about the topic of medical professionalism.
Methods: A systematic search was accomplished on YouTube videos during the period between March 1, 2020 and March 27, 2020. The phrases as significant words used throughout YouTube web search were 'Professionalism in Medical Education', Professionalism in medicine', 'Professionalism of medical students', 'Professionalism in healthcare'. 'Teaching professionalism', 'Attributes of professionalism'. The basic information collected for each video included author's/publisher's name, total number of watchers, likes, dislikes and positive and undesirable remarks. The videos were categorized into educationally useful and useless established on the content, correctness of the knowledge and the advices. Different variables were measured and correlated for the data analysis.YouTube website was searched the using keywords 'Professionalism in Medical Education', Professionalism in medicine', 'Professionalism of medical students', 'Professionalism in healthcare'. 'Teaching professionalism', and 'Attributes of professionalism'.
Results: After 2 rounds of screening by the subject experts and critical analysis of all the 137 YouTube videos, only 41 (29.92%) were identified as pertinent to the subject matter, i.e., educational type. After on expert viewing these 41 videos established upon our pre-set inclusion/exclusion criteria, only 17 (41.46%) videos were found to be academically valuable in nature.
Conclusion: Medical professionalism multimedia videos uploaded by the healthcare specialists or organizations on YouTube provided reliable information for medical students, healthcare workers and other professional. We conclude that YouTube is a leading and free online source of videos meant for students or other healthcare workers yet the viewers need to be aware of the source prior to using it for training learning.
METHODS: YouTube videos were systematically acquired with 4 search terms. The top 50 videos per search term by the number of views were stored in a YouTube account. A set of inclusion/exclusion criteria were applied, videos were assessed for viewing characteristics, a 4-point scoring system (0-3) was applied to evaluate QOI in 10 predetermined domains, and a 3-point scoring system (0-2) was applied to evaluate COI. Descriptive statistical analyses and intrarater and interrater reliability tests were performed.
RESULTS: Strong intrarater and interrater reliability scores were observed. Sixty-three videos from the top 58 most-viewed DPs were viewed 1,395,471 times (range, 414-124,939). Most DPs originated from the United States (20%), and orthodontists (62%) uploaded most of the videos. The mean number of reported domains was 2.03 ± 2.40 (out of 10). The mean overall QOI score per domain was 0.36 ± 0.79 (out of 3). The "Placement of miniscrews" domain scored highest (1.23 ± 0.75). The "Cost of miniscrews placement" domain scored the lowest (0.03 ± 0.25). The mean overall QOI score per DP was 3.59 ± 5.64 (out of 30). The COI in 32 videos was immeasurable, and only 2 avoided using technical words.
CONCLUSIONS: The QOI related to temporary anchorage devices contained within videos provided by DPs through the YouTube Web site is deficient, particularly in the cost of placement. Orthodontists should be aware of the importance of YouTube as an information resource and ensure that videos related to temporary anchorage devices contain comprehensive and evidence-based information.