PURPOSE To evaluate the efficiency of YouTube videos as a source of information for the treatment of amblyopia. METHODS The authors searched YouTube (Google) using the keywords "amblyopia treatment" and analyzed the first 200 most relevant videos. Videos were classified as useful or misleading by two independent ophthalmologists. Videos were scored on 5-point scales to evaluate global quality, reliability, and comprehensiveness. General characteristics, viewer interactions, and sources of videos were also recorded. RESULTS Eighty-seven of 200 videos were appropriate to be included in the current study. Fifty videos (57.5%) were classified as useful and 37 videos (42.5%) were classified as misleading. General characteristics and viewer interactions were not significantly different between useful and misleading videos (P > .05). The mean Global Quality Score, reliability, and comprehensiveness scores were 3.64 ± 1.1, 3.02 ± 1.0, and 2.74 ± 1.2 in useful videos and 2.03 ± 0.9, 2.08 ± 0.8, and 1.62 ± 0.7 in misleading videos, respectively (P < .05). The data suggested that most of the videos uploaded by university channels or non-profit professionals were useful (79.2%), whereas most of the videos uploaded by medical advertisements or for-profit companies were misleading (59.1%). CONCLUSIONS The results of the current cross-sectional study demonstrated that the number of useful videos for the treatment of amblyopia was higher on YouTube. However, there was still a significant number of misleading videos (42.5%). Therefore, more videos on amblyopia treatment that have sufficient reliability, quality, and comprehensiveness should be uploaded to YouTube. [J Pediatr Ophthalmol Strabismus. 2021;58(5):311-318.].

中文翻译：

---

YouTube 视频作为弱视治疗信息来源的评估。

目的 评估 YouTube 视频作为弱视治疗信息来源的效率。方法 作者使用关键字“弱视治疗”搜索 YouTube (Google) 并分析了前 200 个最相关的视频。视频被两位独立的眼科医生归类为有用或误导性的。视频采用 5 分制评分，以评估全球质量、可靠性和全面性。还记录了一般特征、观众互动和视频来源。结果 200 个视频中有 87 个适合包含在当前研究中。50 个视频 (57.5%) 被归类为有用视频，37 个视频 (42.5%) 被归类为误导性视频。有用和误导性视频之间的一般特征和观众互动没有显着差异（P > .05）。有用视频的平均全球质量得分、可靠性和综合性得分分别为 3.64 ± 1.1、3.02 ± 1.0 和 2.74 ± 1.2，误导性视频的平均得分分别为 2.03 ± 0.9、2.08 ± 0.8 和 1.62 ± 0.7（P < .05）。 ）。数据显示，大学频道或非营利专业人士上传的视频大部分是有用的（79.2%），而医疗广告或营利性公司上传的视频大多具有误导性（59.1%）。结论 当前横断面研究的结果表明，YouTube 上用于治疗弱视的有用视频数量更多。但是，仍然存在大量误导性视频（42.5%）。因此，应该将更多具有足够可靠性、质量和全面性的弱视治疗视频上传到YouTube。[J Pediatr Ophthalmol 斜视。2021;58(5):311-318.]。