ArticleBMJ open2022
Quality and reliability evaluation of online videos on carpal tunnel syndrome: a YouTube video-based study.
Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
24 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 50 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluating the quality of osteonecrosis and avascular necrosis content on youtube: a multidimensional analysis using DISCERN, JAMA, and GQS tools.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2025Pooled it
- Characteristics and Popularity of Videos of Abusive Head Trauma Prevention: Systematic Appraisal.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Pooled it
- Assessment of quality and reliability of Chinese-language myocardial infarction content on Bilibili and TikTok: a cross-sectional study.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- ARE POSTS ABOUT TRIGGER FINGER ON THE SOCIAL NETWORKActa ortopedica brasileira · 2026Article
- Machine learning prediction models for the popularization and dissemination of medical science popularization videos.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Changes in Health Education Literacy After Structured Web-Based Education Versus Self-Directed Online Information Seeking in Patients Undergoing Carpal Tunnel Release Surgery: Nonrandomized, Controlled Study.JMIR formative research · 2025Article
- Quality Analysis of YouTube-Based Exercise Programs for Typically Developing Children: Content Analysis.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Quality and Reliability Analysis of YouTube as a Source of Patient Information on de Quervain's Tenosynovitis.Journal of wrist surgery · 2025Article
- The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the quality and reliability of smoking cessation videos on YouTube: a comparative study across three pandemic periods.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Article
- Mycetoma: A critical appraisal of educational content on YouTube.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2024Article
- Assessing quality and reliability of online videos on tachycardia: a YouTube video-based study.BMC public health · 2024Article
- Characteristics, reliability, and quality of YouTube videos on meralgia paresthetica: a descriptive cross-sectional study.Acta neurologica Belgica · 2024Article
- Pitfalls of social media for aesthetic eye surgery patients: assessing YouTube's aesthetic canthoplasty content.International ophthalmology · 2024Article
- The Lack of High-quality Educational Resources about Adhesive Capsulitis on YouTube.Revista brasileira de ortopedia · 2024Article
- Letter to the editor regarding "Are YouTube videos claiming to describe lumbar spinal manipulation techniques adequate? ".The Journal of manual & manipulative therapy · 2023Article
- Are YouTube videos claiming to describe lumbar spinal manipulation techniques adequate?The Journal of manual & manipulative therapy · 2023Article
- Patient-Directed Online Education for Carpal Tunnel Syndrome and Release: Analysis of What Patients Ask and Quality of Resources.Journal of hand surgery global online · 2023Article
- YouTube online videos as a source for patient education of cervical spondylosis-a reliability and quality analysis.BMC public health · 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
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesWith the increasing popularity of searches for medical information on YouTube, the availability of videos concerning carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) is increasing. This study aimed to evaluate the quality and reliability of YouTube videos on CTS. SETTING AND
participantsNo participants were included. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: We searched YouTube on 1 April 2021 using the keywords "carpal tunnel syndrome" and "carpal tunnel release" and evaluated the first 55 retrieved videos. We summarised the video characteristics including Video Power Index (VPI), which was designed to evaluate video popularity based on the number of likes and views. We categorised them based on source and content. Video quality and reliability were evaluated using the
resultsThe mean (range: minimum-maximum) of JAMA scores, GQS and CTS-ss were 2.13 (1-4), 2.69 (1-5), and 5.0 (1-15), respectively. The most common source of video was from allied health workers, and academically sourced videos had the highest JAMA score and GQS. Three scores were significantly correlated with each other. Multiple linear regression analysis showed that a higher JAMA score was associated with a higher likes ratio, and a higher GQS was associated with a longer video running time and greater number of comments. However, a higher VPI was not associated with higher video quality or reliability represented by the three scores.
conclusionsYouTube videos on CTS have low quality and reliability. Video popularity was not significantly correlated with quality or reliability. Our findings suggest that expert groups should provide and promote high-quality video content to YouTube users and patients.
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.