ArticleRheumatology international2018
English-language videos on YouTube as a source of information on self-administer subcutaneous anti-tumour necrosis factor agent injections.
Article in Rheumatology international, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers.
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
40 citing papers in PubMed, 133 citations in OpenAlex.
- Quality, reliability, and educational value of YouTube™ videos on Pavlik harness treatment for developmental dysplasia of the hip.Journal of children's orthopaedics · 2026Article
- Article
- Evaluating the Quality and Reliability of YouTube as a Source of Information on Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation: A Call to Publish More Quality Videos by Professionals.Journal of Korean medical science · 2025Article
- Analysis of Youtube Videos for Artificial Airway Suctioning Training of Nurses: A Content Analysis.Journal of evaluation in clinical practice · 2025Article
- Evaluating YouTube Videos With Prophylactic Mastectomy Content in Terms of Their Quality and Reliability.The breast journal · 2025Article
- YouTube as a Source of Information on Public Health Ethics.Journal of Korean medical science · 2024Article
- YouTube Videos Are a Moderately Comprehensive, Reliable, and Quality Option to Learn About "Multiple Sclerosis and Sexuality".International journal of sexual health : official journal of the World Association for Sexual Health · 2024Article
- Article
- The efficacy and reliability of English YouTube videos as a source of information for pregnant rheumatoid arthritis patients.Clinical rheumatology · 2023Article
- Assessment of quality and reliability of YouTube videos for patient and physician education on inflammatory myositis.Clinical rheumatology · 2023Article
- How high is the quality of the videos about children's elbow fractures on Youtube?Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2023Article
- Usefulness of YouTube in Sharing Information about New Gene Therapy for Spinal Muscular Atrophy: A Content Analysis.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- The Quality, Reliability, and Accuracy of Videos Regarding Exercises and Management for Dysphagia in Pediatric Populations Uploaded on YouTube.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Analysis of YouTube videos as a source of information for myocarditis during the COVID-19 pandemic.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2022Article
- Development and validation of a tool for evaluating YouTube-based medical videos.Irish journal of medical science · 2022Article
- Evaluation of YouTube videos as sources of information about complex regional pain syndrome.The Korean journal of pain · 2022Article
- YouTube as a source of information for water treatments.International journal of biometeorology · 2022Article
- Assessment of the Quality and Reliability of Intragastric Balloon Videos on YouTube.Obesity surgery · 2022Article
- Is social media reliable as a source of information on Peyronie's disease treatment?International journal of impotence research · 2022Article
- Can YouTube be used as an educational tool in lymphedema rehabilitation?Archives of physiotherapy · 2022Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to evaluate the reliability, content, and quality of videos for patients available on YouTube for learning how to self-administer subcutaneous anti-tumour necrosis factor (TNF) injections. We searched for the terms Humira injection, Enbrel injection, Simponi injection, and Cimzia injection. Videos were categorised as useful information, misleading information, useful patient opinion, and misleading patient opinion by two physicians. Videos were rated for quality on a 5-point global quality scale (GQS; 1 = poor quality, 5 = excellent quality) and reliability and content using the 5-point DISCERN scale (higher scores represent greater reliability and more comprehensive videos). Of the 142 English videos, 24 (16.9%) videos were classified as useful information, 6 (4.2%) as misleading information, 47 (33.1%) as useful patient opinion, and 65 (45.8%) as misleading patient opinion. Useful videos were the most comprehensive and had the highest reliability and quality scores. The useful information and useful patient opinion videos had the highest numbers of views per day (median 8.32, IQR: 3.40-14.28 and 5.46, IQR: 3.06-14.44), as compared with 2.32, IQR: 1.63-6.26 for misleading information videos and 2.15, IQR: 1.17-7.43 for misleading patient opinion videos (p = 0.001). Almost all (91.5%) misleading videos were uploaded by individual users. There are a substantial number of English-language YouTube videos, with high quality, and rich content and reliability that can be sources of information on proper technique of anti-TNF self-injections. Physicians should direct patients to the reliable resources of information and educate them in online resource assessment, thereby improving treatment outcomes.
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.