ArticleRestorative dentistry & endodontics2021
YouTube as an information source for instrument separation in root canal treatment.
Article in Restorative dentistry & endodontics, 2021. 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, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of YouTube, TikTok, and Instagram as digital sources for obtaining information about pulp therapy in primary and permanent teeth.Restorative dentistry & endodontics · 2025Article
- Is YouTube a reliable source for learning pre-endodontic build-up? A cross-sectional study.Restorative dentistry & endodontics · 2025Article
- 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
- Article
- Evaluation of the Quality and Reliability of YouTubeTurkish journal of orthodontics · 2024Article
- Quality of Patient-Centered eHealth Information on Erosive Tooth Wear: Systematic Search and Evaluation of Websites and YouTube Videos.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Article
- Assessment of reliability and information quality of YouTube videos about root canal treatment after 2016.BMC oral health · 2022Article
- Assessment of the educational value of endodontic access cavity preparation YouTube video as a learning resource for students.PloS one · 2022Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe reliability and educational quality of videos on YouTube for patients seeking information regarding instrument separation in root canal treatment were evaluated. MATERIALS AND
methodsYouTube was searched for videos on instrument separation in root canal treatment. Video content was scored based on reliability in terms of 3 categories (etiology, procedure, and prognosis) and based on video flow, quality, and educational usefulness using the Global Quality Score (GQS). Descriptive statistics were obtained and the data were analyzed using analysis of variance and the Kruskal-Wallis test.
resultsThe highest mean completeness scores were obtained for videos published by dentists or specialists (1.48 ± 1.06). There was no statistically significant difference among sources of upload in terms of content completeness. The highest mean GQS was found for videos published by dentists or specialists (1.82 ± 0.96), although there was no statistically significant correlation between GQS and the source of upload.
conclusionsVideos on YouTube have incomplete and low-quality content for patients who are concerned about instrument separation during endodontic treatment, or who experience this complication during endodontic treatment.
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.