ArticleActa Cardiologica Sinica2021
YouTube as a Source of Information on Echocardiography: Content and Quality Analysis.
Article in Acta Cardiologica Sinica, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Evaluating YouTube as a source of information on hemifacial spasm.Clinical parkinsonism & related disorders · 2025Article
- Evaluating YouTube as a Good Resource for Enhancing Patient Understanding of Heart Failure.Cureus · 2024Article
- Article
- Quality and Reliability Analysis of YouTube Videos on Magnetic Resonance Imaging Claustrophobia.Cureus · 2023Article
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
backgroundYouTube (YouTube, LLC, San Bruno, CA, USA) is an easily accessible and increasingly popular source of information on health-related issues. This study evaluated the scientific content and quality of English-language echocardiography videos posted to this Internet platform.
methodsFor this study, 583 videos were identified and evaluated following a YouTube search using the keyword 'echocardiography' in July 2020. A total of 92 videos were included in this study following the application of the study exclusion criteria. Both video quality and scientific content were evaluated based on the DISCERN score, global quality score, content score, and total quality score (TQS), which was calculated by adding the scores of the three aforementioned scoring systems.
resultsThe median duration of the included videos was 315 seconds (interquartile range: 173-852 seconds). The median number of views was 33046 (interquartile range: 7445-89012). Twenty-four (26.08%), 43 (46.73%) and 25 (27.17%) videos, respectively, were stratified into the following three groups based on TQS values: group 1 (5-7 points), group 2 (8-11 points) and group 3 (12-14 points). The values of views (median: 45072), video duration (median: 474), power index (median: 80250) and popularity (median: 34) were significantly higher in group 3 than in the other groups. The duration that a video was online was statistically significantly higher in group 1.
conclusionsThe results suggest that YouTube is an important tool for easily sharing health-related information and disseminating it to large audiences. It can be concluded from the growing interest in videos with scientific content and the high quality scores recorded that YouTube offers accurate and quality information about echocardiography.
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.