ArticleRestorative dentistry & endodontics2021
YouTube as a source of information about pulpotomy and pulp capping: a cross sectional reliability analysis.
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 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- YoutubeInternational journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Pooled it
- TikTok as a Source of Information on Temporomandibular Disorders: Reliable Health Education or Misinformation?Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry · 2025Review
- Is YouTube a reliable source for learning pre-endodontic build-up? A cross-sectional study.Restorative dentistry & endodontics · 2025Article
- Comparison of YouTube, TikTok, and Instagram as digital sources for obtaining information about pulp therapy in primary and permanent teeth.Restorative dentistry & endodontics · 2025Article
- Assessing the reliability and educational value of YouTube videos on computer-controlled local anesthesia in dentistry.PloS one · 2025Article
- Examination of Information Quality on Public Instagram Profiles Regarding Botulinum Toxin for Bruxism: A Study in São Paulo State, Brazil.Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry · 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
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe purpose of this study was to critically evaluate the quality, reliability and educational content of the information of vital pulp treatment videos available on YouTube. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe keywords "pulpotomy" and "pulp capping" were searched on YouTube on 5th July 2020, until 60 English language videos of each search term with a duration shorter than 15 minutes were acquired. Video characteristics were recorded and Video Power Index (VPI) was calculated. Reliability and educational quality of videos were evaluated using the Modified DISCERN score, the
resultsRegarding pulpotomy, 31.7% of the videos were uploaded by specialists and 68.3% were directed by non-specialists. In the case of pulp capping, the corresponding percentages were 45% and 55%, respectively. Videos uploaded by specialists had significantly higher modified DISCERN, JAMA and GQS scores compared to those uploaded by non-specialists. Endodontists tended to have the highest reliability and VPI scores.
conclusionsYouTube videos on vital pulp treatment contain low educational quality or incomplete information. Low popularity of dental pulp capping and pulpotomy videos may be attributed to the specialized nature of these procedures. As YouTube represents an important source for patient information about different health topics, reliable informative videos should be uploaded by specialized dental professionals.
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.