ArticleCardiovascular diagnosis and therapy2019
Evaluation of YouTube as a reliable source for patient education on aortic valve stenosis.
Article in Cardiovascular diagnosis and therapy, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluating the educational quality and reliability of YouTube videos on red light therapy for eye diseases.Lasers in medical science · 2026Article
- Quality, reliability and engagement of aortic dissection-related health information on TikTok: a cross-sectional study from China.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Article
- Assessing the Quality and Reliability of Cardiac Rehabilitation Information on YouTube: A Systematic Evaluation.Cureus · 2024Article
- Article
- Entering the Misinformation Age: Quality and Reliability of YouTube for Patient Information on Liposuction.Plastic surgery (Oakville, Ont.) · 2023Article
- Assessment of the Quality and Reliability of Information on YouTube Regarding Angiography and Angioplasty.Cureus · 2023Article
- YouTube as a Source of Information on Echocardiography: Content and Quality Analysis.Acta Cardiologica Sinica · 2021Article
- Evaluation of YouTube Videos as a Source of Information About Oral Self-examination to Detect Oral Cancer and Precancerous Lesions.Journal of International Society of Preventive & Community DentistryArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors at 7 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAortic stenosis (AS) is a prevalent disease in the elderly population and has been a public health concern for decades. YouTube is currently being used for obtaining healthcare related information. We evaluated the quality of information about AS on YouTube for patient education.
methodsYouTube was queried for the search phrases "aortic valve stenosis", "aortic valve replacement", "transcatheter aortic valve replacement" and "TAVR". Videos were assessed for their reliability and content with two five-point scales. They were categorized into groups according to usefulness and uploader source. All videos were assessed for audience interaction. Videos were viewed and analyzed by 2 independent investigators. Conflicts were resolved by a third investigator.
resultsSearch phrases yielded 69,300 videos, among which, 120 videos were evaluated and 85 videos were included in the final analysis. Of the 85 videos, only 45 videos (53%) were found to be useful while 40 videos (47%) were found to be non-useful. The majority (98%) of the useful videos were uploaded by professional sources. Overall, videos uploaded by non-professional sources had higher number of views (23,553
conclusionsThere is a potential to increase public awareness about aortic valve stenosis and the available treatment options by utilizing YouTube. Professional societies are encouraged to provide more useful material that can deliver comprehensive and reliable information in an entertaining and intuitive manner to the public.
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.