ArticleFrontiers in surgery2021
Evaluation of YouTube Videos as a Source of Patient Information for Ureteric Stent Placement: A Quality Assessment Study.
Article in Frontiers in surgery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- YouTube as a Reliable Source of Patient Education for Peyronie's Disease: A Quality Assessment Study.Cureus · 2026Article
- YouTube and TikTok as patient resources: assessment of online video content on extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy.Central European journal of urology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo assess the quality of YouTube videos on ureteric stent placement (USP) as a source of patient available.
methodsYouTube was searched using search terms "DJ stenting," "Double J stenting," and "ureteric stenting." The initial 100 videos displayed with each of the above mentioned search terms were scrutinized. The selected videos reviewed by 3 independent consultant urologists against a pre-agreed scoring system based upon European Association of Urology (EAU) patient information sheet on ureteric stent placement. The videos were scored qualitatively and quantitatively based on the scores achieved in various domains of the scoring Performa. Data was also collected for the number of views, likes, dislikes, and time duration of each video.
resultsA total of 22 videos which fulfilled the inclusion criteria were reviewed. All the videos were uploaded by healthcare organizations or healthcare websites. None of the videos were classified as "Good" based on reviewer scores and only one video was classified as "acceptable." Fourteen videos were classified as "very poor" with a score of <5/20. General information about stents was described by majority of the studies whilst preoperative information, procedure description, danger signs, and follow up were scarcely described by most videos.
conclusionMajority of YouTube videos on USP are of poor overall quality and lack pertinent information. This calls for creation of comprehensive and unbiased videos for patient information on USP.
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.