A Comparative Analysis of Turkish and English YouTube Videos on Peyronie's Disease in Terms of Content, Quality, and Reliability

İbrahim Can Aykanat¹, Buğra Cidani¹, Muhammed Çakır¹, Çağdaş Şenel¹, Şakir Ongun¹

¹Department of Urology, Balıkesir University Faculty of Medicine, Balıkesir, Türkiye

DOI : 10.5505/GJU.2026.93685

Pages : 087-093

Abstract

Objective: This study aimed to comparatively evaluate Turkish and English YouTube videos related to Peyronie"s disease in terms of content, quality, and reliability.

Materials and Methods: In this observational cross-sectional study, YouTube searches were conducted between January 1 and 15, 2026, using Turkish ("Peyronie hastalığı", "penis eğriliği") and English ("Peyronie"s disease", "penile curvature") keywords. After applying inclusion and exclusion criteria, a total of 351 videos (143 Turkish, 208 English) were included. Videos were analyzed according to source of upload, content theme, and engagement metrics. Video quality and reliability were assessed using the JAMA Benchmark Criteria, Modified DISCERN, and Global Quality Score (GQS). Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS version 26.0.

Results: English videos had significantly longer durations and higher view and like counts compared to Turkish videos (all p<0.001). English videos also demonstrated significantly higher JAMA, Modified DISCERN, and GQS scores (p<0.001). Guideline-discordant or incomplete information was identified in 23.8% (34/143) of Turkish videos and 6.7% (14/208) of English videos, with a statistically significant difference between languages (χ²=19.44; p<0.001). Most videos containing guideline-discordant information were uploaded by private practice or private hospital physicians. In both languages, videos focusing on non-surgical treatments exhibited the lowest quality and reliability scores.

Conclusion: English YouTube videos on Peyronie"s disease provide higher-quality and more reliable information compared to Turkish videos. In Turkish content, guideline-discordant information is predominantly concentrated in individually produced and promotional videos. Greater involvement of academic institutions and professional associations in digital health content creation is essential to improve the quality of online patient education.

Introduction

Peyronie"s disease is a condition characterized by the formation of fibrotic plaques within the tunica albuginea of the penis, leading to penile curvature, pain, and sexual dysfunction, thereby significantly impairing male quality of life [1]. Although Peyronie"s disease can occur across all age groups, it is most commonly encountered in middle-aged men. The reported prevalence of the disease in the literature varies widely, with rates ranging from 0.3% to 20%. Nevertheless, despite differences in study methodologies, the most frequently cited prevalence is approximately 9% [2-4]. It is well recognized that some patients avoid seeking medical care due to embarrassment or reluctance, and even when they do present to healthcare facilities, they often turn to internet-based resources to obtain additional information regarding diagnosis and treatment [5,6].

In recent years, online video-sharing platforms such as YouTube have become easily accessible sources of health-related information for patients. Indeed, in daily urological practice, it is frequently observed that patients actively use YouTube to acquire supplementary information about their medical conditions [7-9]. However, the quality of content available on YouTube is not always adequate, and the largely unregulated nature of the platform may facilitate the dissemination of misleading or inaccurate information.

Although studies evaluating the content quality and reliability of English-language YouTube videos related to Peyronie"s disease are available in the literature, there is currently no study focusing on Turkish-language content [10]. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to comparatively evaluate Turkish and English YouTube videos related to Peyronie's disease in terms of content, quality, and reliability.

Materials and Methods

This study was designed as an observational cross-sectional analysis based on the content evaluation of YouTube videos related to Peyronie's disease. For the assessment of Turkishand English-language videos, an application was submitted to the institutional Health Research Ethics Committee, and it was confirmed that ethical approval was not required for this study.

YouTube searches were conducted between January 1 and January 15, 2026. The keywords "Peyronie hastalığı" and "penis eğriliği" were used for Turkish content, while "Peyronie"s disease" and "penile curvature" were used for English content. Searches were performed in a logged-out (non-personalized) mode in both languages, and YouTube's default relevance-based sorting algorithm was applied. For each language, the first 200 videos retrieved from the search results were initially screened for eligibility.

Each video was individually reviewed to determine its suitability for inclusion. The inclusion criteria required that the video be in the relevant language and aim to provide information about Peyronie"s disease. Videos unrelated to the disease, offtopic or misleading content (e.g., videos retrieved due to keyword matches but created solely for humorous purposes), duplicate videos, and short-form videos (YouTube "Shorts") with a duration of less than one minute were excluded. In addition, videos without audio or with very poor visual quality were not considered eligible for analysis.

Ultimately, the URLs of the included videos were recorded, and the following data were collected for each video (Figure 1).

Figure 1. Flow diagram of the search, screening, and selection process of YouTube videos related to Peyronie"s disease

General characteristics: The upload date, video duration (minutes), number of views, likes, and comments were recorded.

Source of upload: Based on similar studies in the literature and in line with the aims of the present study, the source of upload was classified into five main categories:

(1) Academic institutions or hospitals (universities, training and research hospitals),
(2) Health information websites or urological associations (institutional health platforms and professional societies),
(3) Private practice or private hospital physicians (videos uploaded by individual physicians or private healthcare institutions),
(4) Patients or non-physician individuals (patient experience– based content or non-medical personal channels),
(5) Television programs (health-related programs or media organizations).

For videos produced through collaboration between multiple individuals or institutions, classification was based on the dominant source presenting the primary content of the video.

Content theme: Videos were categorized according to their main thematic focus based on the primary information provided. Accordingly, each video was assigned to one of the following categories:

(1) Anatomy and general information (disease definition, etiology, pathophysiology, and clinical characteristics),
(2) Symptoms and diagnosis (clinical findings and diagnostic approaches),
(3) Non-surgical treatments (pharmacological therapies, intralesional injections, and other conservative approaches),
(4) Surgical procedures (surgical techniques and operative approaches).

When a video addressed more than one topic, classification was performed according to the predominant content theme.

Content accuracy: The scientific accuracy of the medical information presented in the videos was evaluated based on current clinical guidelines and the available literature. Two independent urologists (ÇŞ, İCA) reviewed each video and classified the content as either accurate or inaccurate/misleading according to its consistency with up-to-date evidence. Videos providing evidence-based and guideline-concordant information regarding the management of Peyronie's disease were classified as containing accurate information, whereas videos presenting unproven claims or treatment recommendations not supported by current guidelines were categorized as containing inaccurate or misleading information. In cases of disagreement between the two reviewers, consensus was achieved through an independent evaluation by a third senior urologist (ŞO).

Assessment of video quality and reliability: The quality and comprehensibility of the health-related information provided in the videos were assessed using multiple objective and widely accepted evaluation tools reported in the literature (Table 1) [11- 13]. Each video was independently scored by two investigators using the following assessment instruments.

Table 1. Assessment tools used for evaluating the content quality and reliability of YouTube videos

All videos were evaluated independently by the two reviewers using the aforementioned scoring systems. When discrepancies occurred between the reviewers, the video in question was reevaluated by a third expert, and consensus was reached.

Statistical Analysis
All statistical analyses were performed using SPSS software version 26.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA). Continuous variables were reported as mean ± standard deviation or median with interquartile range (IQR), depending on data distribution, while categorical variables were presented as frequencies and percentages (%). Normality of continuous variables was assessed using the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test.

Comparisons between Turkish and English videos were conducted using the Student's t-test for normally distributed continuous variables and the Mann–Whitney U test for nonnormally distributed variables. Categorical variables were compared using the chi-square test, or Fisher's exact test when expected cell counts were insufficient. A p value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant for all analyses.

Results

A total of 351 YouTube videos were included in the analysis, of which 143 (40.7%) were in Turkish and 208 (59.3%) were in English. Comparisons between Turkish and English videos revealed that English videos had significantly longer durations, higher numbers of views, and more likes than Turkish videos (all p < 0.001). In contrast, the number of comments was significantly higher in Turkish videos (p = 0.002) (Table 2).

Tablo 2. Comparison of content characteristics, quality, and reliability scores of Turkish and English YouTube videos on Peyronie's disease

Regarding content quality and reliability, English videos achieved significantly higher scores than Turkish videos across all assessment tools, including the JAMA Benchmark Criteria, Modified DISCERN score, and Global Quality Score (GQS) (all p < 0.001). When guideline adherence was evaluated, guideline-discordant or incomplete information was identified in 34 Turkish videos (23.8%), compared with 14 English videos (6.7%). The difference in the prevalence of guideline-discordant content between Turkish and English videos was statistically significant (χ² = 19.44; p < 0.001) (Table 2).

All Turkish videos containing guideline-discordant information (34/34, 100%) were uploaded by physicians working in private practices or private hospitals. In contrast, among the 14 English videos with guideline-discordant or incomplete information, 8 (57.1%) were uploaded by private practice or private hospital physicians, 4 (28.6%) by patients or non-physician individuals, and 2 (14.3%) by health information websites or non-profit organizations.

Most Turkish videos were uploaded by physicians from private practices or private hospitals and primarily consisted of promotional content. Conversely, the distribution of upload sources among English videos was more heterogeneous, with a higher proportion originating from academic institutions and health information websites/urological associations (Figure 2). A statistically significant difference was observed between Turkish and English videos in terms of upload source distribution (χ² = 99.05; p < 0.001).

Figure 2. Distribution of sources of upload for Turkish and English YouTube videos related to Peyronie"s disease

When video content types were analyzed, videos in both language groups predominantly focused on anatomy and general information. However, a statistically significant difference in content distribution was observed between Turkish and English videos (χ² = 25.03; p < 0.001) (Figure 3).

Figure 3. Distribution of Turkish- and English-language YouTube videos on Peyronie"s disease according to content categories

When analyses were stratified by upload source and language, English videos were found to have higher mean numbers of views and likes than Turkish videos across all source categories. In particular, English videos uploaded by academic institutions, health information websites, and urological associations demonstrated markedly higher levels of viewership and user engagement. In contrast, Turkish videos generally exhibited lower viewing and interaction rates, with the relatively highest numbers of views and likes observed in content originating from television programs (Figure 4).

Figure 4. Comparison of the mean number of views and likes of YouTube videos on Peyronie"s disease according to upload source and language

Evaluation of quality and reliability scores according to upload source revealed substantial differences in JAMA, Modified DISCERN, and GQS scores across source types and languages (Figure 5). In English videos, content produced by health information websites, urological associations, and academic institutions achieved higher quality and reliability scores, whereas videos uploaded by physicians from private practices or private hospitals demonstrated lower scores in both language groups.

Figure 5. Comparison of JAMA, Modified DISCERN, and GQS scores of YouTube videos on Peyronie"s disease according to source of upload and language

In analyses based on video content type, English videos consistently showed higher mean numbers of views and likes than Turkish videos across all content categories (Figure 6). Among English-language videos, the highest view counts were observed in content focusing on symptoms and diagnosis, while in Turkish videos, relatively higher view counts were noted in videos addressing non-surgical treatment options. In both language groups, videos focusing on non-surgical treatments received the highest numbers of likes.

Figure 6. Comparison of the mean view and like counts of YouTube videos according to video content and language

When quality and reliability scores were evaluated according to content type, English videos achieved higher JAMA, Modified DISCERN, and GQS scores than Turkish videos across all categories (Figure 7). Nevertheless, in both language groups, videos focusing on non-surgical treatments exhibited lower JAMA, Modified DISCERN, and GQS scores compared with other content types.

Figure 7. Comparison of JAMA, Modified DISCERN, and GQS scores of YouTube videos according to video content and language

Discussion

This study provides a comprehensive comparative analysis of Turkish and English YouTube videos related to Peyronie"s disease in terms of content, quality, and reliability. Our findings demonstrate that, beyond language differences, both the source of upload and the primary focus of video content play a decisive role in determining information quality and adherence to clinical guidelines. In our analysis, English-language videos were found to have longer durations and significantly higher numbers of views and likes compared with Turkish videos. The broader global use of the English language may partly explain these differences. Supporting this assumption, previous studies comparing English and Turkish YouTube content have similarly reported longer video durations and higher engagement metrics for English-language videos [14].

In the present study, Turkish videos exhibited significantly lower JAMA, Modified DISCERN, and GQS scores than English videos, along with a higher prevalence of guideline-discordant information. One plausible explanation for this finding is that Turkish videos predominantly consisted of promotional content uploaded by physicians working in private practices or private hospitals, while videos produced by academic institutions or hospitals were relatively scarce. Prior studies have shown that videos uploaded by academic institutions, urological associations, and health information websites rarely contain guideline-discordant information and generally provide more balanced, evidence-based content, reflected by higher JAMA, Modified DISCERN, and GQS scores [15,16]. Consistent with these findings, Aydın et al. reported that YouTube videos on chronic prostatitis uploaded by individual physicians frequently lacked sufficient scientific accuracy [17].

Similarly, Baydilli et al., in their analysis of English-language YouTube videos on Peyronie's disease, reported that a substantial proportion of videos were of low to moderate quality and provided limited guideline-concordant treatment information, particularly among content produced by individual creators and commercially motivated sources. In that study, treatmentfocused and highly popular videos more frequently contained inaccurate or incomplete information—often emphasizing herbal products or experimental approaches—with nearly half of such videos (48.3%) being inconsistent with current clinical guidelines. Moreover, videos containing misinformation were shown to receive higher daily view and like counts compared with those providing accurate information [10].

High view or like counts, however, should not be interpreted as indicators of accuracy, balance, or reliability. Indeed, studies evaluating YouTube content across various medical topics have consistently demonstrated that videos with lower information quality may achieve higher view counts and broader dissemination, thereby facilitating the spread of inaccurate or incomplete health information [18,19]. In line with these observations, our study found that videos focusing on nonsurgical treatment options—particularly in both Turkish and English content—were characterized by higher user engagement alongside lower JAMA, Modified DISCERN, and GQS scores, as well as a higher frequency of guideline-discordant information. This finding highlights a clear mismatch between popularity and scientific quality. These results suggest that engagement-driven algorithms on social media platforms may prioritize attentiongrabbing narratives and "easy solution" messages over scientific accuracy. Importantly, this issue does not appear to be specific to Peyronie"s disease but rather reflects a broader challenge inherent to digital health content dissemination [18,20].

From a public health perspective, patients with conditions associated with sexual health and potential stigma, such as Peyronie"s disease, are particularly likely to seek information through digital platforms. Our findings indicate that Turkishspeaking patients are disproportionately exposed to individual, often promotional, video content. Such exposure may contribute to unrealistic expectations, delays in seeking effective treatment, and deterioration of the patient–physician relationship. Therefore, greater involvement of urological associations and academic institutions in producing high-quality Turkish- language digital content is essential, along with a more proactive role in guiding digital health communication.

Several limitations of this study should be acknowledged. First, YouTube search results are inherently dynamic; thus, the analyzed videos represent a specific time frame, and results may change over time. Second, the study was limited to Turkish and English videos, excluding content in other languages. Third, although widely used and validated tools such as the JAMA benchmark criteria, Modified DISCERN, and Global Quality Score were employed, some degree of subjectivity in quality assessment is unavoidable. Nevertheless, this limitation was mitigated by independent evaluations conducted by two reviewers, with consensus achieved through a third evaluator when necessary. Finally, engagement metrics such as views and likes reflect popularity rather than scientific accuracy and should not be interpreted as indicators of information quality.

Conclusion

This study demonstrates substantial differences between Turkish and English YouTube videos related to Peyronie's disease in terms of content, quality, and reliability. English-language videos generally achieved higher JAMA, Modified DISCERN, and Global Quality Score values, whereas Turkish videos more frequently contained guideline-discordant or incomplete information, particularly within specific source and content categories. Videos focusing on non-surgical treatment options were associated with lower quality and reliability scores in both languages. Notably, all Turkish videos containing guidelinediscordant information were uploaded by physicians working in private practices or private hospitals, highlighting the need for critical appraisal of physician-generated digital content. These findings underscore the importance of more active involvement by academic institutions and professional societies in producing reliable, evidence-based health information on digital platforms.

Ethics Committee Approval: For the assessment of Turkishand English-language videos, an application was submitted to the institutional Health Research Ethics Committee, and it was confirmed that ethical approval was not required for this study. Accordingly, ethical approval was waived in accordance with institutional and international research guidelines.

Informed Consent: This observational study evaluated publicly available YouTube videos and did not involve human participants or confidential data.

Publication: The results of the study were not published in full or in part in form of abstracts.

Peer-review: Externally peer-reviewed.

Authorship Contributions: Any contribution was not made by any individual not listed as an author. Concept – İ.C.A; Design – İ.C.A., Ç.Ş.; Supervision – Ç.Ş.; Resources – B.C., M.Ç.; Materials – B.C., M.Ç.; Data Collection and/or Processing – B.C., M.Ç.; Analysis and/or Interpretation – İ.C.A., Ç.Ş.; Literature Search – İ.C.A., B.C.; Writing Manuscript – İ.C.A.; Critical Review –Ş.O.

Conflict of Interest: The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Financial Disclosure: The authors declare that this study received no financial support.