Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34668066›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2022

Attending guidance advised: educational quality of surgical videos on YouTube.

Hope T Jackson, Chen-Min S Hung, Deepika Potarazu, Noor Habboosh, Erik J DeAngelis, Richard L Amdur, Jordan M Estroff, Megan T Quintana, Paul Lin, Khashayar Vaziri and 1 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Informational Quality of YouTube Content on Partial Meniscectomy Remains Inadequate.Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Hope T JacksonDepartment of Surgery, The George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences, 2150 Pennsylvania Ave, NW, Suite 6B-402, Washington, DC, 20037, USA. hjackson@mfa.gwu.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2373-9786
Chen-Min S HungDepartment of Surgery, The George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences, 2150 Pennsylvania Ave, NW, Suite 6B-402, Washington, DC, 20037, USA.
Deepika PotarazuDepartment of Surgery, The George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences, 2150 Pennsylvania Ave, NW, Suite 6B-402, Washington, DC, 20037, USA.
Noor HabbooshDepartment of Surgery, The George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences, 2150 Pennsylvania Ave, NW, Suite 6B-402, Washington, DC, 20037, USA.
Erik J DeAngelisDepartment of Surgery, The George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences, 2150 Pennsylvania Ave, NW, Suite 6B-402, Washington, DC, 20037, USA.
Richard L AmdurDepartment of Surgery, The George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences, 2150 Pennsylvania Ave, NW, Suite 6B-402, Washington, DC, 20037, USA.
Jordan M EstroffDepartment of Surgery, The George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences, 2150 Pennsylvania Ave, NW, Suite 6B-402, Washington, DC, 20037, USA.
Megan T QuintanaDepartment of Surgery, The George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences, 2150 Pennsylvania Ave, NW, Suite 6B-402, Washington, DC, 20037, USA.
Paul LinDepartment of Surgery, The George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences, 2150 Pennsylvania Ave, NW, Suite 6B-402, Washington, DC, 20037, USA.
Khashayar VaziriDepartment of Surgery, The George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences, 2150 Pennsylvania Ave, NW, Suite 6B-402, Washington, DC, 20037, USA.
Juliet LeeDepartment of Surgery, The George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences, 2150 Pennsylvania Ave, NW, Suite 6B-402, Washington, DC, 20037, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionYouTube is the most used platform for case preparation by surgical trainees. Despite its popular use, studies have noted limitations in surgical technique, safety, and vetting of these videos. This study identified the most viewed laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) videos on YouTube and analyzed the ability of attendings, residents, and medical students to identify critical portions of the procedure, technique, and limitations of the videos.

methodsAn incognito search was conducted on YouTube using the term "laparoscopic cholecystectomy." Results were screened for length, publication date, and language. The top ten most viewed videos were presented to general surgery attendings, residents, and medical students at a single academic institution. Established rubrics were used for evaluation, including the Critical View of Safety (CVS) for LC, a modified Global Operative Assessment of Laparoscopic Skills (GOALS) score, a task-specific checklist, and visual analog scales for case difficulty and operator competence. Educational quality and likelihood of video recommendation for case preparation were evaluated using a Likert scale. Attending assessments were considered the gold standard.

resultsSix attending surgeons achieved excellent internal consistency on CVS, educational quality, and likelihood of recommendation scales, with Cronbach alpha (⍺) of 0.93, 0.92, and 0.92, respectively. ⍺ was ≥ 0.7 in all the other scales measured. Attending evaluations revealed that only one of the ten videos attained all three established CVS criteria. Four videos demonstrated none of the CVS criteria. The mean educational quality (mEQ) was 4.63 on a 10-point scale. The mean likelihood of recommendation (mLoR) for case preparation was 2.3 on a 5-point scale. Senior resident assessments (Postgraduate Year (PGY)4 + , n = 12) aligned with attending surgeons, with no statistically significant differences in CVS attainment, mEQ, and mLoR. Junior residents (PGY1-3, n = 17) and medical students (MS3-4, n = 20) exhibited significant difference with attendings in CVS attainment, mEQ, and mLoR for more than half the videos. Both groups tended to overrate videos compared to attendings.

conclusionYouTube is the most popular unvetted resource used for case presentation by surgical trainees. Attending evaluations revealed that the most viewed LC videos on YouTube did not attain the CVS, and were deemed as inappropriate for case preparation, with low educational value. Senior resident video assessments closely aligned with attendings, while junior trainees were more likely to overstate video quality and value. Attending guidance and direction of trainees to high-quality, vetted resources for surgical case preparation is needed. This may also suggest a need for surgical societies with platforms for video sharing to prioritize the creation and dissemination of high-quality videos on easily accessible public platforms.

Indexed as

Cholecystectomy, LaparoscopicLaparoscopySocial MediaClinical CompetenceHumansVideo RecordingCritical view of safetyEducationLaparoscopic cholecystectomyOnline learning

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.