Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/11499/54963
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorÇokakoğlu, Serpil-
dc.contributor.authorÇakır, Ezgi-
dc.date.accessioned2023-11-18T09:57:44Z-
dc.date.available2023-11-18T09:57:44Z-
dc.date.issued2023-
dc.identifier.issn2630-6158-
dc.identifier.issn2651-2823-
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.26650/eor.20231152882-
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11499/54963-
dc.description.abstractPurposeThe aim of this study was to evaluate YouTube videos as a source of information for digital indirect bonding techniques.Materials and MethodsThe keyword digital indirect bonding was first searched on YouTube, resulting in 57 recorded videos. Descriptive parameters, including source, target audience, purpose, duration, upload date, number of likes, dislikes, views, and comments, were then evaluated. After this initial assessment, the interaction index and viewing rate were calculated. Video content quality was determined using a 5-point scale that categorized videos as having poor, moderate, or good content quality. This rating was based on the presence and discussion of various topics related to digital indirect bonding, including digital scan, digital bracket placement, transfer tray production from a 3D-printed model or direct production as a 3D-printed tray, clinical application, and advantages and/or disadvantages. The videos were assessed for quality using the global quality scale (GQS) and video information and quality index (VIQI). Statistical evaluation was conducted using Kruskal-Wallis, Chi-square, and Pearson correlation analysis, and intraclass correlation coefficients were calculated to determine the rating reliability.ResultsThe majority of the videos were classified as having poor content quality (41.9%), followed by moderate (38.7%) and good (19.4%) content quality. No significant differences were found between the videos in terms of descriptive parameters. However, videos with good content quality had significantly higher GQS and VIQI scores than moderate and poor content videos. The total content showed significant correlations with GQS and VIQI (r=0.780 and r=0.446, respectively; p<0.05).ConclusionIn conclusion, while the majority of YouTube videos regarding digital indirect bonding were of poor content quality, those that were of good content quality could be considered a useful source of professional information.en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherIstanbul Univ Press, Istanbul Univ Rectorateen_US
dc.relation.ispartofEuropean Oral Researchen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccessen_US
dc.subjectDigitalen_US
dc.subjectindirect bondingen_US
dc.subjectinformationen_US
dc.subjectvideoen_US
dc.subjectYouTubeen_US
dc.subjectOrthodontic Retentionen_US
dc.subjectResourceen_US
dc.titleYoutube videos as a source of information on digital indirect bonding: A content analysisen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.volume57en_US
dc.identifier.issue3en_US
dc.identifier.startpage138en_US
dc.identifier.endpage143en_US
dc.departmentPamukkale Universityen_US
dc.identifier.doi10.26650/eor.20231152882-
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85176388407en_US
dc.identifier.wosWOS:001084530600005en_US
dc.institutionauthor-
item.languageiso639-1en-
item.openairetypeArticle-
item.grantfulltextnone-
item.cerifentitytypePublications-
item.fulltextNo Fulltext-
item.openairecristypehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_18cf-
crisitem.author.dept06.01. Clinical Sciences-
Appears in Collections:Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi Koleksiyonu
Scopus İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu / Scopus Indexed Publications Collection
WoS İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu / WoS Indexed Publications Collection
Show simple item record



CORE Recommender

Page view(s)

42
checked on May 27, 2024

Google ScholarTM

Check




Altmetric


Items in GCRIS Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.