ArticleCureus2022
Evaluation of the Reliability and Quality of YouTube Videos on Ovarian Cysts.
Article in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluating YouTube Videos With Prophylactic Mastectomy Content in Terms of Their Quality and Reliability.The breast journal · 2025Article
- Laparoscopic myomectomy videos on WebSurg and YouTube: does peer review process make a difference?Journal of the Turkish German Gynecological Association · 2024Article
- Appraising Unmet Needs and Misinformation Spread About Polycystic Ovary Syndrome in 85,872 YouTube Comments Over 12 Years: Big Data Infodemiology Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Article
- Quality and Content Analysis: Can YouTube Videos on Agoraphobia Be Considered a Reliable Source?Cureus · 2023Article
- Article
- Popular science and education of cosmetic surgery in China: Quality and reliability evaluation of Douyin short videos.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2023Article
- Article
- Quality and Reliability Analysis of YouTube Videos on Magnetic Resonance Imaging Claustrophobia.Cureus · 2023Article
- Article
- 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
2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim The aim of this study is to investigate the quality and reliability of YouTube videos containing content related to ovarian cysts. Methods The search terms "Ovarian Cyst", "Ovarian Cyst Symptoms", "Ovarian Cyst Treatment", and "Ovarian Cyst Diagnosis" were searched on YouTube. A total of 110 videos were examined and repetitive videos, non-English videos, videos with advertising content, videos with entertainment and news content, and videos with very poor image and sound quality were excluded. Finally, the videos included in the study were evaluated using DISCERN and Global Quality Scale (GQS). Results It was found that 50 videos examined in this study were uploaded between the years 2014 and 2020, with an average of 492.252 ± 710.768 and a total of 24.612.595 views. The mean DISCERN score given to 50 videos analyzed by two researchers was 2.81 ± 1.3 and the mean GQS score was 2.88 ± 1.4. When we divided the scores given to the videos by two researchers into three groups, it was determined that 27 (54%) of the 50 videos were in the misleading/poor quality group, nine (18%) were in the medium quality group, and 14 (28%) were in the useful/quality group. Conclusion It has been determined that the videos with "ovarian cyst" content on YouTube are generally of poor quality. Bad quality videos were uploaded by non-doctors and attracted more attention than videos uploaded by doctors.
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.