Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27029480›Full record

ArticleInternational orthopaedics2016

YouTube provides irrelevant information for the diagnosis and treatment of hip arthritis.

Ulrich Koller, Wenzel Waldstein, Klaus-Dieter Schatz, Reinhard Windhager

Open access · hybridAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International orthopaedics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 44 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
44citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
12.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

44 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 120 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. TLIF Online Videos for Patient Education-Evaluation of Comprehensiveness, Quality, and Reliability.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Ulrich KollerDepartment of Orthopaedics, Vienna General Hospital, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria.
Wenzel WaldsteinDepartment of Orthopaedics, Vienna General Hospital, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria. wwaldstein@gmail.com.
Klaus-Dieter SchatzDepartment of Orthopaedics, Vienna General Hospital, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria.
Reinhard WindhagerDepartment of Orthopaedics, Vienna General Hospital, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria.
Medical University of Vienna · ATVienna General Hospital · AT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeYouTube is increasingly becoming a key source for people to satisfy the need for additional information concerning their medical condition. This study analyses the completeness of accurate information found on YouTube pertaining to hip arthritis.

methodsThe present study analyzed 133 YouTube videos using the search terms: hip arthritis, hip arthritis symptoms, hip arthritis diagnosis, hip arthritis treatment and hip replacement. Two quality assessment checklists with a scale of 0 to 12 points were developed to evaluate available video content for the diagnosis and the treatment of hip arthritis. Videos were grouped into poor quality (grade 0-3), moderate quality (grade 4-7) and excellent quality (grade 8-12), respectively. Three independent observers assessed all videos using the new grading system and independently scored all videos. Discrepancies regarding the categories were clarified by consensus discussion. For intra-observer reliabilities, grading was performed at two occasions separated by four weeks.

resultsEighty-four percent (n = 112) had a poor diagnostic information quality, 14% (n = 19) a moderate quality and only 2% (n = 2) an excellent quality, respectively. In 86% (n = 114), videos provided poor treatment information quality. Eleven percent (n = 15) of videos had a moderate quality and only 3% (n = 4) an excellent quality, respectively.

conclusionsThe present study demonstrates that YouTube is a poor source for accurate information pertaining to the diagnosis and treatment of hip arthritis. These finding are of high relevance for clinicians as videos are going to become the primary source of information for patients. Therefore, high quality educational videos are needed to further guide patients on the way from the diagnosis of hip arthritis to its proper treatment.

Indexed as

ArthritisHip JointHumansInternetQuality Assurance, Health CareVideo RecordingDiagnosisHip arthritisInformation qualityTreatmentYouTube

Identifiers

PMID27029480
OpenAlexW2325456534

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.