ArticleEmergency medicine international2019
Assessment of the Accuracy of Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Videos in English on YouTube according to the 2015 AHA Resuscitation Guidelines.
Article in Emergency medicine international, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Didactic and Content Quality of Basic Life Support Videos on YouTube: Cross-Sectional Study.JMIR formative research · 2025Article
- The use of social media platforms in adult basic life support research: a scoping review.Resuscitation plus · 2025Review
- Assessment of the Quality, Content, and Reliability of YouTube Videos on Automated External Defibrillator Use: A Cross-Sectional Study.Emergency medicine international · 2025Article
- YouTube as an information source in deep margin elevation: Reliability, accuracy and quality analysis.PloS one · 2025Article
- YouTube as a source of information in cardiopulmonary resuscitation for 2020 AHA Resuscitation Guidelines.PeerJ · 2024Observational
- YouTube as a Source of Information in Trauma Management for ATLS (10th Edition) Guidelines: Evaluation of Trauma Management Videos on YouTube.Emergency medicine international · 2024Article
- [Development and validation of a checklist for evaluating videos for learning resuscitation measures].Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin · 2022Article
- Cardiopulmonary resuscitation for lay people: Evaluation of videos from the perspective of digital health literacy.Revista latino-americana de enfermagem · 2022Article
- [Education for resuscitation].Notfall & rettungsmedizin · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Over the last decade, YouTube has become one of the largest online resources for medical information. However, uploaded videos are published without any peer review or quality control, so incorrect and incomplete information can be easily disseminated via the virtual platform and can be perceived as correct. The YouTube website was searched for videos in English uploaded between 15 October 2015 and 21 October 2016 using the following keywords: "CPR," "cardiopulmonary resuscitation," and "basic life support." This study had a cross-sectional analytical design. In the first evaluation, the accuracy of the videos was checked according to the information contained in the basic cardiac life support algorithm. In the second evaluation, we assessed whether advanced-level, innovative medical information was included in these videos; when included, the accuracy of such information was checked. Of 774 videos evaluated, 92 videos were included in the study after application of the exclusion criteria. The videos were scored on a scale ranging from 0 to 20 points. The mean total score, based on all criteria, was 4.79 ± 2.88. The highest mean total score was achieved by videos uploaded by official medical organizations (6.43 ± 3.57), followed by those uploaded by health professionals and organizations (4.25 ± 2.49), and those uploaded by unidentified sources. YouTube videos are insufficient in providing information about the basic life support algorithm and advanced-level information according to the 2015 AHA resuscitation guidelines for health professionals. The educational material published by health institutions that are constantly working in the area is a more reliable source of information on subjects that directly affect human life, such as cardiopulmonary resuscitation.
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.