ArticleInternational journal of impotence research2021
A systematic evaluation of youtube as an information source for male infertility.
Article in International journal of impotence research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Social Media and Men's Health: Separating Science from Speculation in Andrology.Basic and clinical andrology · 2025Review
- Quality and Content Analysis: Can YouTube Videos on Agoraphobia Be Considered a Reliable Source?Cureus · 2023Article
- Analysis of quality information provided by "Dr. YouTubeInternational journal of impotence research · 2023Article
- Quality and Reliability Analysis of YouTube Videos on Magnetic Resonance Imaging Claustrophobia.Cureus · 2023Article
- YouTube as a Source of Information on Pilonidal Sinus Disease: A Reliability and Quality Analysis.Cureus · 2023Article
- Knowledge, Attitude, and Perceptions about In Vitro Fertilization (IVF) among Women of Childbearing Age in Cape Coast, Ghana.Obstetrics and gynecology international · 2022Article
- [Sexual health information on social media: a systematic scoping review].Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz · 2021Article
- YouTube as a Patient Education Resource for Male Hypogonadism and Testosterone Therapy.Sexual medicine · 2021Article
- Evaluation of YouTube Videos as a Source of Patient Information for Ureteric Stent Placement: A Quality Assessment Study.Frontiers in surgery · 2021Article
- A review of the evolving landscape between the consumer Internet and men's health.Translational andrology and urology · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study evaluates YouTube videos (YTVs) focused on male infertility to assess information quality and identify high-quality content that can reliably facilitate care. Top 50 YTVs based on relevance were identified using the keyword "male infertility." A checklist, adapted from American Urological Association guidelines addressing male infertility, was developed to assess YTV content. Two investigators extracted YTV features (including duration, likes, views, upload date), classified creators and ranked YTVs based on checklist scores. YTVs were then assigned grades A-D based on checklist scores. Kruskal-Wallis test and ANOVA were employed to draw associations between grades, content creator, and YTV features. Higher grades were associated with shorter video duration (p = 0.0305). Most YTVs (23/42) were created by healthcare-related organizations. Of the 42 YTVs included in the final analysis, 31% (13/42) explicitly defined infertility as an inability to conceive after 12 months of unprotected intercourse. Ninety percent (38/42) discussed male infertility evaluation methods, while 71% (30/42) discussed various interventions. Various content creators have adopted YouTube to discuss male infertility, and healthcare practitioners should be aware of YouTube's potential influence on patient understanding of male infertility. Knowledge gaps identified in YTVs can help improve patient counseling and enable practitioners to direct patients to reliable content.
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.