ArticleJournal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education2019
YouTube Videos as a Source of Information on Colorectal Cancer: What Do Our Patients Learn?
Article in Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
39 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Quality of Cancer-Related Information on New Media (2014-2023): Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Pooled it
- Effectiveness of Colorectal Cancer Screening Promotion Using E-Media Decision Aids: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Pooled it
- How Well Do "Dr. Google" and "Professor YouTube" Answer Health Questions for Pediatric Kidney Transplant Recipients and Caregivers?Pediatric transplantation · 2026Article
- Evaluating Quality, Guideline Accuracy, and Racial/Ethnic Representation of YouTube Videos on Colon Cancer Screening.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2026Article
- Assessing the scientific quality of radiotherapy popularization videos on BiliBili and TikTok: a cross-sectional study.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Evaluating the Quality and Reliability of YouTube Videos Providing Nutritional Recommendations for Irritable Bowel Syndrome.Journal of human nutrition and dietetics : the official journal of the British Dietetic Association · 2025Article
- Assessment of the Usefulness and Reliability of YouTube Videos on Postmortem Procedures.Cureus · 2025Article
- Article
- Cancer incidence and digital information seeking in Germany: a retrospective observational study.Scientific reports · 2024Observational
- Evaluation of the Quality and Comprehensiveness of YouTube Videos Discussing Pancreatic Cancer.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2023Article
- Assessment of Lung Cancer YouTube Videos for Patient Education.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2023Article
- Article
- Radionuclide Therapy Videos on YouTube as An Educational Material: Has the COVID-19 Pandemic Changed the Quality, Usefulness, and Interaction Features.Nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2023Article
- Navigating Radiation Therapy During COVID-19 Using YouTube as a Source of Information.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2023Article
- Article
- Quality and accuracy of gastric cancer related videos in social media videos platforms.BMC public health · 2022Article
- Is YouTube a high-quality source of information on cancer rehabilitation?Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2022Article
- A Digital Cancer Ecosystem to Deliver Health and Psychosocial Education as Preventive Intervention.Cancers · 2022Article
- Content Quality of YouTube Videos About Gestational Diabetes: Systematic Evaluation.JMIR diabetes · 2022Article
- Netiquette for social media engagement for oncology professionals.Future oncology (London, England) · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
YouTube is the second most visited website in the world. No studies to date have characterized and evaluated YouTube videos on colorectal cancer (CRC) although these videos could influence patient decision-making, notably regarding screening and prevention. This study aims to report the characteristics and quality of these videos as patient education resources for CRC. YouTube's search engine was queried with different search phrases relating to CRC. The first two pages of each search result were analyzed. Two specialists devised a critical appraisal tool with a list of criteria to assess the videos. Quantitative YouTube parameter analyses and criteria assessment were performed. Inter-rater agreement was assessed between three raters. A total of 46 videos were eligible to be included in the study. The videos were on average 4:51 ± 3:27 min long. The videos had 10 times as many likes as dislikes. Less than half the videos discussed risk factors and protective factors. Only 41% of videos mentioned screening tests and only about a quarter discussed them. Palliative care was only mentioned in 2% of videos. A single video could obtain a perfect score on the critical appraisal tool. Length was the unique parameter associated with a high score on the criteria list. There is thus a need for more authoritative and comprehensive videos easily identifiable by the patients. Video popularity is not associated with comprehensiveness. Currently, YouTube might not be an education resource for CRC suited to every patient.
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.