# Assessment of the Quality, Content, and Reliability of YouTube Videos on Automated External Defibrillator Use: A Cross-Sectional Study

## TL;DR

This study evaluated the accuracy and reliability of YouTube and Google videos on using automated external defibrillators, finding that most were from health institutions and had similar quality regardless of source.

## Contribution

The study introduces a systematic evaluation of public defibrillator training videos, revealing no significant quality differences based on institutional affiliation or mannequin fidelity.

## Key findings

- Most videos were uploaded by health institutions and were shorter than noninstitutional videos.
- Video scores did not significantly differ based on mannequin fidelity or upload source.
- Institutional videos had a median length of 180 seconds, significantly shorter than noninstitutional ones.

## Abstract

Objective: The aim of our study was to evaluate the accuracy and reliability of videos available on YouTube and Google showing the use of automated external defibrillators.

Methods: Videos available on YouTube and Google between 2020 and 2023 were searched using the search terms “Defibrillator,” “Resuscitation,” “Basic life support,” “Cardiac arrest,” “CPR,” “Cardiac shock,” “Chest trust,” or “First aid.” Data such as the year the video was uploaded, number of views, and video length were collected. The videos were watched and evaluated by two independent emergency physicians. According to the 6-stage evaluation criteria, 1 point was given if the information given in the video was correct and 0 point was given if no information was given. The maximum score was determined as 6 and the minimum score as 1.

Results: Out of a total of 315 videos uploaded to the specified platforms, 29 met the inclusion criteria. After the evaluation, the average score given to the videos was 5.45 ± 1.02. When the videos were categorized as low and medium-high according to their fidelity levels, there was no statistically significant difference between these two groups in terms of the number of views, video length, and the score given (p=0.469, 0.078, and 0.110, respectively). Videos from institutions were shorter, with a median length of 180 s compared to 289 s for noninstitution uploads (p=0.047). Both groups received similar scores, with a median of 6 for each (p=0.257).

Conclusion: The main findings of our study were that most of the videos were uploaded by health institutions and were shorter. Video scores did not differ according to the level of loyalty of the mannequins used and the uploading source.