ArticleCureus2022
Evaluation of the Accuracy and Quality of Information in Videos About Lateral Epicondylitis Shared on Internet Video Sharing Services.
Article in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- YouTube Videos on Lateral Epicondylitis Often Lack High-Quality, Reliable Information.Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation · 2025Article
- YouTube as an information source in deep margin elevation: Reliability, accuracy and quality analysis.PloS one · 2025Article
- Assessment of Reliability and Quality of Videos on Medial Epicondylitis Shared on YouTube.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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose In this study, it was aimed to determine the quality and accuracy of the videos on YouTube about lateral epicondylitis. Methods The first 100 videos were included in the study by typing the keyword "lateral epicondylitis" in the YouTube search tab without using any filters. The video power index (VPI) was used to evaluate the popularity of the videos, and the global quality score (GQS), Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), and DISCERN scoring systems were used to evaluate the quality. The obtained data were statistically analyzed according to these scoring systems. Results The mean DISCERN, JAMA, and GQS of the analyzed videos were 46.66, 3.13, and 3.85, respectively. According to these results, it was determined that the videos were of medium quality. A statistically insignificant and weak correlation was found between the VPI and DISCERN, GQS, and JAMA scores (p>0.05, intraclass correlation coefficient, ICC: -0.05, 0.09, and -0.05, respectively). While there was no significant relationship between the video source and the DISCERN, JAMA, and GQS scores (p>0.05), it was determined that the DISCERN, JAMA, and GQS scores in the exercise videos were significantly higher than in the other content types in terms of the video content (p=0.041). Conclusions According to the results obtained, it was determined that YouTube videos about lateral epicondylitis were not of sufficient quality. In order to ensure standardization for quality videos, internationally acceptable guidelines should be determined and studies should be carried out to provide an adequate infrastructure for the preparation of quality medical videos that can meet the increasing needs of patients by health institutions.
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.