Indian Journal of Palliative Care
Open access journal 
  Print this page Email this page   Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size Users online: 845  
     Home | About | Feedback | Login 
  Current Issue Back Issues Editorial Board Authors and Reviewers How to Subscribe Advertise with us Contact Us Analgesic Prescription  
  Navigate Here 
 Resource Links
  »  Similar in PUBMED
 »  Search Pubmed for
 »  Search in Google Scholar for
 »Related articles
  »  Article in PDF (491 KB)
  »  Citation Manager
  »  Access Statistics
  »  Reader Comments
  »  Email Alert *
  »  Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  

  In this Article
 »  Abstract
 » Introduction
 »  Youtube and Pall...
 »  Youtube and Pall...
 »  Youtube and Pall...
 » Discussion
 »  References
 »  Article Tables

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded95    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal


Table of Contents 
Year : 2016  |  Volume : 22  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 104-107

Maintaining the social flow of Evidence-Informed palliative care: Use and misuse of YouTube

Department of Physiotherapy, Maharishi Markandeshwar Institute of Physiotherapy and Rehabilitation, Maharishi Markandeshwar University, Ambala, Haryana, India

Date of Web Publication14-Jan-2016

Correspondence Address:
Senthil Paramasivam Kumar
Department of Physiotherapy, Maharishi Markandeshwar Institute of Physiotherapy and Rehabilitation, Maharishi Markandeshwar University, Ambala, Haryana
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/0973-1075.173945

Rights and Permissions

 » Abstract 

This review article is aimed to explore the use of the social media website YouTube ( as an evidence resource in palliative care, for patients and caregivers, students and professionals, and providers and policy-makers in developing countries' settings. The reviewed evidence reiterated the role of this social media website in palliative care practice, education and research in the area of cancer. Efficacy studies on impact of such media on palliative care delivery in developing countries are still lacking.

Keywords: Social media, Palliative care networking, Public health education

How to cite this article:
Jamwal NR, Kumar SP. Maintaining the social flow of Evidence-Informed palliative care: Use and misuse of YouTube. Indian J Palliat Care 2016;22:104-7

How to cite this URL:
Jamwal NR, Kumar SP. Maintaining the social flow of Evidence-Informed palliative care: Use and misuse of YouTube. Indian J Palliat Care [serial online] 2016 [cited 2021 Jan 24];22:104-7. Available from:

 » Introduction Top

The rising popularity of internet-based technologies, such as applications for social networking, media sharing or blogging, has drastically changed the way in which healthcare professionals interact with educators, peers, and the outside world.[1] Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube are three most popular social networking sites, which professional associations and bodies utilize to develop interpersonal communication.[2]

These websites combine media production and distribution with social networking features, making them an ideal place to create, connect, collaborate, and circulate among public. By encouraging the general public to become media creators and social networkers, new media platforms like YouTube offer a participatory culture in which people can develop, interact, and learn.[3]

YouTube is an increasingly important medium for consumer health information with content provided by healthcare professionals, government and nongovernment organizations, industry, and consumers themselves.[4] The objective of this article was to highlight the role of YouTube in palliative care in terms of practice, education, research, and administration.

 » Youtube and Palliative Care Practice Top

Jackson et al.[5] said that YouTube could help a clinical practice retain its existing patients and attract new patients to the practice through public education and online marketing. YouTube had enabled new and efficient exchange of personal stories by cancer survivors, including the sharing of personal cancer experience with their caregivers, thereby informing the development of narrative-based communication, particularly in maintaining authenticity and emotional engagement.[6]

Wittenberg-Lyles et al.[7] in their systematic review identified 43 videos that provided video-based instruction. They were primarily talk-based without any onscreen action, mostly user-generated amateur video, and had poor quality sources of information. Videos were also clinician-centered and the majority of videos addressed the need for caregiver pain assessment and caregiver education, with a few addressing specific caregiver pain management barriers.

Diagnostic or therapeutic procedure-related videos


Basch et al.[8] reviewed 173 videos on mammography in YouTube and found that greater public comments were present for consumer-created videos than professional-created ones, the latter portraying more general information. Two-thirds were on preparation for testing and only one-third were on procedure-related pain, anxiety, and fear. Half of the videos were on test results and one-fourth were on medical/family history.

Bowel preparation and colonoscopy

Basch et al.[9] analyzed 280 videos on bowel preparation and found that: Professional-created videos had more views (focusing on purgative type and completing the preparation) and consumer-created ones had more comments (emphasizing palatability, disgust, and hunger during the procedure) which would have direct impact on attitudes toward colon cancer screening.


Clerici et al.[10] studied 149 videos on pediatric neoplastic diseases (rhabdomyosarcoma and soft tissue sarcoma) and found that only 25 videos were useful. 82.5% of the videos were provided by patients and families, with most of them commemorating the death of their child. Thus, social media helped as a strategy for coping with the child's death by providing an opportunity for describing caregivers' impressions and experiences.

Prostate cancer

Steinberg et al.[11] analyzed 14 prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing videos, 5 radiotherapy videos, and 32 surgery videos on YouTube and found that surgery videos had more viewers, and were of long duration. The information content was found to be fair or poor for 73% of all videos, with bias in nearly 69% of videos.

Human papillomavirus vaccination

Briones et al.[12] examined 172 videos for source, tone, and viewer responses and found that most of them were news clips or consumer-generated content. The majority of them were disapproving of vaccination and were liked by viewers. The analysis showed that there were accusations of conspiracy and infringement of civil liberties.

Ache and Wallace [13] analyzed 146 videos and found that three-fourths of them portrayed HPV vaccination in a positive manner, and one-third of the clips generated at least one posted comment.

Breast reconstruction

Tan et al.[14] analyzed the quality and quantity of 100 videos and found three distinct factors-patient, oncological, and reconstruction factors, with most of the videos providing patient education as a useful resource [Table 1].
Table 1: Comparison of YouTube videos on diagnosis/therapeutic procedures

Click here to view

 » Youtube and Palliative Care Education Top

An increasing amount of health education resources for patients and professionals are distributed via online social media channels and thousands of health education videos are disseminated via YouTube.[15] YouTube is increasingly being used as a global online platform for disseminating health information and providing public health education.[16] Few authors recommended integration of YouTube into medical,[1] nursing,[17] and dental curricula,[18] even though many videos were targeted toward clinical skills education.[19]

 » Youtube and Palliative Care Research Top

Konijn et al.[20] opined that “YouTube provided (a) An environment to present manipulated media materials in controlled experimental designs; (b) an environment to study effects of peer feedback on various media contents; (c) a format to design a media-based questionnaire, such as their Media, Morals, and Youth Questionnaire.” Hence, YouTube could be an effective medium in scientific communication to collect data for research, and with many limitations to conduct direct-contact studies, online studies thus provide a viable alternative.[21]

 » Discussion Top

Use of YouTube

Topps et al.[22] opined on the use of YouTube, “YouTube was found to provide many advantages over self-publication, particularly in terms of technical simplification, increased audience, discoverability, and analytics.”

Mazanderani et al.[23] opined, “social media technologies provide patients with novel opportunities for advocating for particular treatments; generating alternative forms of “evidence” built on a hybrid of personal experience and medical knowledge. Healthcare practitioners need to engage with new digital forms of content, including online social media. Instead of disregarding sources not considered “evidence-based”, practitioners should enhance their understanding of what “experiential-evidence” is deemed significant to patients, particularly in contested areas of healthcare.”

Misuse of YouTube

Hayanga and Kaiser [24] opined about the misuse of YouTube, “the application of a formal appraisal to a freeware website that is unregulated, uncensored, and designed more for entertainment than the dissemination of evidence-based medical advice may lend false gravitas to an unstructured, unvalidated online rating system as well as medical credence to a conduit of popular culture.”

Referring to YouTube for information on palliative care has demonstrated its own risks and benefits, although the latter overweighs the former if content providers, care providers, and organizations take responsibility and foster a new era of evidence-informed palliative care by uploading patient-based videos based upon real-life situations.

Madathil et al.[16] in their systematic review found that YouTube contained misleading information, predominantly anecdotal, which contradicts the established reference standards and a higher probability of a lay user finding such content. YouTube was also used as a medium for promoting unscientific therapies and drugs that were yet to be approved by the appropriate regulatory agencies and hence has the potential to change the beliefs of patients concerning controversial topics like vaccinations.

Information retrieval was misled by inappropriate hits due to lack of search tags and accepted taxonomies for listing of videos.[15] YouTube videos must be carefully analyzed in order to avoid misleading, inaccurate, obsolete, and incorrect health content, which could be improvised using domain-based ranking.[25]

In the era of technology-driven scientific dissemination in evidence-informed palliative care, the consumers in resource-rich countries utilize social media sites to inform themselves on decision-making choices whereas in resource-poor settings, it is the provider who holds responsibility for the accuracy of videos uploaded in YouTube so that effective public transformation could be facilitated to improve services to the needy. Future studies could explore these differences in order to develop policies to implement evidence-informed palliative care through information technology and social networking.

Financial support and sponsorship


Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.

 » References Top

Farnan J, Paro JA, Higa J, Edelson J, Arora VM. The YouTube generation: Implications for medical professionalism. Perspect Biol Med 2008;51:517-24.  Back to cited text no. 1
Williams B. Twitter, Facebook and YouTube: The TMA turns to social media to engage members. Tenn Med 2010;103:27-8.  Back to cited text no. 2
Chau C. YouTube as a participatory culture. New Dir Youth Dev 2010;2010:65-74.  Back to cited text no. 3
Sampson M, Cumber J, Li C, Pound CM, Fuller A, Harrison D. A systematic review of methods for studying consumer health YouTube videos, with implications for systematic reviews. PeerJ 2013;1:e147.  Back to cited text no. 4
Jackson R, Schneider A, Baum N. Social media networking: YouTube and search engine optimization. J Med Pract Manage 2011;26:254-7.  Back to cited text no. 5
Chou WY, Hunt Y, Folkers A, Augustson E. Cancer survivorship in the age of YouTube and social media: A narrative analysis. J Med Internet Res 2011;13:e7.  Back to cited text no. 6
Wittenberg-Lyles E, Parker Oliver D, Demiris G, Swarz J, Rendo M. YouTube as a tool for pain management with informal caregivers of cancer patients: A systematic review. J Pain Symptom Manage 2014;48:1200-10.  Back to cited text no. 7
Basch CH, Hillyer GC, MacDonald ZL, Reeves R, Basch CE. Characteristics of YouTube™ videos related to mammography. J Cancer Educ 2014; [Epub ahead of print].  Back to cited text no. 8
Basch CH, Hillyer GC, Reeves R, Basch CE. Analysis of YouTube™ videos related to bowel preparation for colonoscopy. World J Gastrointest Endosc 2014;6:432-5.  Back to cited text no. 9
Clerici CA, Veneroni L, Bisogno G, Trapuzzano A, Ferrari A. Videos on rhabdomyosarcoma on YouTube: An example of the availability of information on pediatric tumors on the web. J Pediatr Hematol Oncol 2012;34:e329-31.  Back to cited text no. 10
Steinberg PL, Wason S, Stern JM, Deters L, Kowal B, Seigne J. YouTube as source of prostate cancer information. Urology 2010;75:619-22.  Back to cited text no. 11
Briones R, Nan X, Madden K, Waks L. When vaccines go viral: An analysis of HPV vaccine coverage on YouTube. Health Commun 2012;27:478-85.  Back to cited text no. 12
Ache KA, Wallace LS. Human papillomavirus vaccination coverage on YouTube. Am J Prev Med 2008;35:389-92.  Back to cited text no. 13
Tan ML, Kok K, Ganesh V, Thomas SS. Patient information on breast reconstruction in the era of the world wide web. A snapshot analysis of information available on Breast 2014;23:33-7.  Back to cited text no. 14
Konstantinidis S, Fernandez-Luque L, Bamidis P, Karlsen R. The role of taxonomies in social media and the semantic web for health education. A study of SNOMED CT terms in YouTube health video tags. Methods Inf Med 2013;52:168-79.  Back to cited text no. 15
Madathil KC, Rivera-Rodriguez AJ, Greenstein JS, Gramopadhye AK. Healthcare information on YouTube: A systematic review. Health Informatics J 2014; [Epub ahead of print].  Back to cited text no. 16
Sharoff L. Integrating YouTube into the nursing curriculum. Online J Issues Nurs 2011;16:6.  Back to cited text no. 17
Knösel M, Jung K, Bleckmann A. YouTube, dentistry, and dental education. J Dent Educ 2011;75:1558-68.  Back to cited text no. 18
Duncan I, Yarwood-Ross L, Haigh C. YouTube as a source of clinical skills education. Nurse Educ Today 2013;33:1576-80.  Back to cited text no. 19
Konijn EA, Veldhuis J, Plaisier XS. YouTube as a research tool: Three approaches. Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw 2013;16:695-701.  Back to cited text no. 20
Welbourne DJ, Grant WJ. Science communication on YouTube: Factors that affect channel and video popularity. Public Underst Sci 2015; [Epub ahead of print].  Back to cited text no. 21
Topps D, Helmer J, Ellaway R. YouTube as a platform for publishing clinical skills training videos. Acad Med 2013;88:192-7.  Back to cited text no. 22
Mazanderani F, O'Neill B, Powell J. “People power” or “pester power”? YouTube as a forum for the generation of evidence and patient advocacy. Patient Educ Couns 2013;93:420-5.  Back to cited text no. 23
Hayanga AJ, Kaiser HE. Medical information on YouTube. JAMA 2008;299:1424-5.  Back to cited text no. 24
Karlsen R, Borrás Morell JE, Fernández Luque L, Traver Salcedo V. A domain-based approach for retrieving trustworthy health videos from YouTube. Stud Health Technol Inform 2013;192:1008.  Back to cited text no. 25


  [Table 1]


Print this article  Email this article
Online since 1st October '05
Published by Wolters Kluwer - Medknow