ArticleInternational journal of preventive medicine2018
Assessment of Information on Concussion Available to Adolescents on Social Media.
Article in International journal of preventive medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Approaches to Research Ethics in Health Research on YouTube: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Pooled it
- Is social media a promising global health center for the concussed? A scoping review of concussion coverage across social media.Health promotion perspectives · 2025Review
- A global snapshot of the silent brain injury epidemic: A descriptive observational study of concussion coverage on YouTube.Health promotion perspectives · 2025Article
- Assessing universal considerations in infant mortality across the globe: A descriptive observational study of sudden infant death syndrome knowledge and reduction coverage on YouTube.Health promotion perspectives · 2024Article
- Not Just for Dancing? A Content Analysis of Concussion and Head Injury Videos on TikTok.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundConsidering how many people obtain information about their health online, the aim of this study was to describe the content of the currently most widely viewed YouTube videos related to concussions and to test the hypothesis that consumer videos would be anecdotal, while other sources would be more informational.
methodsThe term "concussion" was used to search for videos with 100,000 or more views on YouTube that were posted in English or Spanish. Descriptive information about each video was recorded, as was information on whether certain content was conveyed during the video. The main outcome measures are sources of upload and content of videos.
resultsConsumer videos accounted for 48% of the videos, television based accounted for 50% of the videos, and internet based accounted for only 2% of the videos. None of the videos viewed fell into the professional category. Television based videos were viewed significantly more than consumer or internet based videos. Consumer and television based videos were equally anecdotal. Many of the videos focused on adolescents and were related to sports injuries. The majority of the videos (70.4%) addressed concussion causes, with 48% stating sports. Few videos discussed symptoms of concussion and prevention.
conclusionsThe potential for widespread misinformation necessitates caution when obtaining information on concussion on a freely accessible and editable medium, such as YouTube.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.