ArticleInternational journal of impotence research2022
Is social media reliable as a source of information on Peyronie's disease treatment?
Article in International journal of impotence research, 2022. 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.
- YouTube as a source of information on retrograde ejaculation: insights into content reliability.International journal of impotence research · 2026Article
- Analysis of the YouTube videos on intracavernosal injection in terms of their comprehensiveness, reliability and quality.International journal of impotence research · 2026Article
- YouTube and TikTok as patient resources: assessment of online video content on extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy.Central European journal of urology · 2026Article
- Social Media and Men's Health: Separating Science from Speculation in Andrology.Basic and clinical andrology · 2025Review
- Assessing the educational value of laparoscopic radical nephrectomy videos on YouTube®: A comparative analysis of short versus long videos.Journal of minimal access surgery · 2025Article
- The spreading information of YouTube videos on Phosphodiesterase 5 inhibitors: a worrisome picture from one of the most consulted internet source.International journal of impotence research · 2024Article
- Article
- Editorial commentary: Is social media a reliable source of information on Peyronie's disease treatment?International journal of impotence research · 2022Article
- Assessing information on YouTube™ as a quality source for the treatment of varicoceles.Indian journal of urology : IJU : journal of the Urological Society of IndiaArticle
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Although YouTube video is one of the most widely used and easily accessible information sharing sources, its widespread use can carry the risk of spreading misleading and unreliable information. We aimed to evaluate the accuracy, reliability, quality, and content of the most viewed YouTube videos related to Peyronie's disease treatment. The keywords of "penile curvature", "penile deformity", "bent penis" "curved penis", and "Peyronie's disease" were searched on YouTube. Among 700 YouTube videos, 267 videos were included in the study. They were categorized by two independent urologists with board certification as accurate information (n = 138, 51.7%) or inaccurate information (n = 129, 48.3%). Accurate videos contained information about the treatment of Peyronie's disease with proven scientific accuracy according to the current guidelines, whereas inaccurate videos contained scientifically unproven or incorrect information and recommendations not in the guidelines. A 5-point modified DISCERN scale and Global Quality Score were used for reliability and quality assessment. Although the accurate information group had a significantly higher DISCERN Score (3, IQR = 3-4 vs. 1, IQR = 1-2, p < .001) and Global Quality Score (5, IQR = 4-5 vs. 2, IQR = 1-3 p < 0.001); the number of views per day (10.37, IQR = 3.01-28.12 vs. 6.65, IQR = 1.55-27.87) and likes (36, IQR = 6-145 vs. 19.5, IQR = 4-121.7) were higher but not significant in the inaccurate information group. The majority of the videos in the inaccurate information group were uploaded by medical advertisement/for profit companies (51.2%) and individual users/patients (38.8%), whereas universities/professional organizations/nonprofit physician/physician groups constituted the majority in the accurate information group (60.9%). According to our findings, videos containing inaccurate information are more popular. People should be made aware that they should not immediately believe the videos containing medical advertisements without consulting nonprofit physicians.
Indexed as
Identifiers
34172941What 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.