Observational studyBMC geriatrics2022
The reliability, functional quality, understandability, and actionability of fall prevention content in YouTube: an observational study.
Observational study in BMC geriatrics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Physical Activity Misinformation on Social Media: Systematic Review.JMIR infodemiology · 2025Pooled it
- TikTok, RedNote, and Bilibili as sources of medical information on chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a cross-platform content analysis.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Article
- Assessment of the quality and reliability of public health communication about hypertension on short video platforms in China.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- BiliBili, Douyin and Xiaohongshu as health information platforms for stroke: evaluating information quality and content.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Evaluating the Content and Quality of Videos Related to Hypertrophic Scarring on TikTok in China: Cross-Sectional Study.JMIR infodemiology · 2025Article
- 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFalls are common but dangerous in the elderly. More and more seniors are searching for healthcare information online. YouTube has become the world's most popular video streaming platform. Albeit thousands of fall prevention videos are available on YouTube, their reliability, functional quality, understandability, and actionability have not been verified.
methodsThe top 300 watched videos on YouTube related to fall prevention were retrieved. After exclusion, all qualified sample videos were evaluated by three validated assessment instruments (the PEMAT scale, the HONCode scale, and the DISCERN instrument) regarding their reliability, functional quality, understandability, and actionability. Each video's length, number of views/likes/comments, forms of expression, and the uploader's profile were collected as well. The Wilcoxon rank sum test was performed for further analysis from the perspective of expression forms and uploaders' identities.
resultsOne hundred thirty-seven videos (45.67%) were qualified as sample videos, and individuals/organizations with medical backgrounds posted 54.01% of them. Most of the excluded videos (n = 163) were irrelevant (n = 91, 55.83%), and commercial (n = 52, 31.90%). The median video length for sample videos was 470 seconds. The DISCERN instrument indicated that 115 videos (83.94%) were of moderate to high overall quality. Medical practitioners and organizations gained the highest scores in functional quality and reliability (P < 0.05), while they also tended to use technical terms more often (mean = 3.15). The HONCode scale suggested a lack of traceability was common. The most popular and actionable form of expression was workout (n = 58, median score = 86.90, P < 0.05), while monolog and keynote presentations scored the highest in understandability (no significant difference between them). The PEMAT scale suggested videos uploaded by medical teams were the easiest to be understood (P = 0.011 and P < 0.001, respectively), whereas they were less actionable than those made by fitness trainers (P = 0.039 and P < 0.001, respectively).
conclusionsCooperation between the medical team and fitness trainers is expected for better health promotion. Plain language is advised, and sources should be provided. As for expression form, monolog or keynote presentations, plus workout clips, might be the most effective.
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.