ArticleCureus2021
Characteristics Assessment of Online YouTube Videos on Radiotherapy for Lung Cancer.
Article in Cureus, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- YouTube Videos as a Tool to Educate Medical Students About Careers in Radiation Oncology.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2026Article
- YouTube as a Reliable Source of Patient Education for Peyronie's Disease: A Quality Assessment Study.Cureus · 2026Article
- Breast Cancer Vlogs on YouTube: Descriptive and Content Analyses.JMIR infodemiology · 2025Article
- The quality of YouTube videos on radiotherapy and prostatectomy for prostate cancer.Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada · 2024Article
- Article
- Assessment of Lung Cancer YouTube Videos for Patient Education.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2023Article
- 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
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction The internet has become a mainstay source of health information for cancer patients. Online patient education videos are common; however, there have been no studies examining the quality of publicly available videos on radiotherapy for lung cancer (one of the most common forms of cancer). To fill this knowledge gap, we aim to systematically map and objectively assess videos discussing radiotherapy for lung cancer on YouTube. Methods The terms "radiotherapy for lung cancer," "radiation for lung cancer," "radiation therapy for lung cancer," and "radiation treatment for lung cancer" were searched on YouTube using a clear-cache browser. Results were sorted by relevance and the top 50 English-language results for each search were recorded. After removing duplicates, each video was assessed for length, Video Power Index (VPI, which is the product of a video's average daily views and like and dislike ratio), source, content, comment moderation, and misinformation. Two raters were used to ensure consistency. Results were evaluated using descriptive and inferential statistics. Results A total of 88 unique videos resulted from the search. The median video length was 4 minutes and 5 seconds. The average VPI was 10.9 (95% CI: 1.5-20.4) and the median number of views was 954.5. All videos were published between July 8, 2009 and November 18, 2020. Of the videos, 44% were published within the past two years. A total of 61% of the videos were from the USA, 14% were from the UK, 6% from Australia, 5% each from Canada and India, and other countries make up the remaining 10%. Most of the videos were published by healthcare facilities (39%) and non-profit organizations (31%). Content-wise, 95% of videos contain information specific to lung cancer. A total of 46 videos (52%) were targeted toward patient education. Of which, 37 covered radiotherapy for lung cancer, 12 covered side effects for radiotherapy, and 11 covered both. The other 42 videos (48%) were designed for a professional audience. Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT)/stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) was the most commonly described radiotherapy modality (42%), and the physician interview was the most common format, being used in 59% of videos. Out of the 38 videos with at least one comment, only two (5%) were moderated by the host channel. None of the videos featured misleading information. Conclusions This study comprehensively surveyed YouTube videos pertaining to radiotherapy for lung cancer to provide a high-level overview of the information that patients may find online. Although nearly half of the videos describe lung cancer radiotherapy for patients, only a small proportion comprehensively cover both radiotherapy and its side effects. The results of our study can help guide the development of patient education tools and encourage healthcare providers to recognize the limitations of online health information and proactively address patient questions regarding radiotherapy. Future research could examine videos on other lung cancer treatment options or radiotherapy for other cancers.
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.