ArticleFrontiers in public health2022
Quality of online video resources concerning patient education for neck pain: A YouTube-based quality-control study.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 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
21 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 33 citations in OpenAlex.
- Physical Activity Misinformation on Social Media: Systematic Review.JMIR infodemiology · 2025Pooled it
- Characteristics and Popularity of Videos of Abusive Head Trauma Prevention: Systematic Appraisal.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Pooled it
- Article
- Content and quality analysis of YouTube videos on therapeutic exercises for Parkinson's disease.Journal of Parkinson's disease · 2026Article
- Quality and dissemination of thyroid cancer information on short-video platforms a cross-platform evaluation.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- How to select high-quality health educational short videos on social media? insights from youtube and douyin.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- YouTube as a source of education on piriformis injection: a content, quality, and reliability analysis.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- Professionalism vs. engagement: quality of SSc information on WeChat.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Quality, reliability, and dissemination of lung cancer information on short-video platforms in China: a cross-platform content analysis of TikTok, Kwai, and Rednote.Frontiers in public health · 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
- YouTube as a Source of Patient Information for Cervical Spine Fractures: A Content Quality and Audience Engagement Analysis.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- YouTube as a source of education on tunneled catheter insertion: content and quality analysis.BMC medical education · 2024Article
- Videos in Short-Video Sharing Platforms as Sources of Information on Colorectal Polyps: Cross-Sectional Content Analysis Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Article
- Assessing quality and reliability of online videos on tachycardia: a YouTube video-based study.BMC public health · 2024Article
- Qualitative research on undergraduate nursing students' recognition and response to short videos' health disinformation.Heliyon · 2024Article
- YouTube videos on lymphedema as an information source for Spanish speaking breast cancer survivors.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024Article
- Schlieren imaging and video classification of alphabet pronunciations: exploiting phonetic flows for speech recognition and speech therapy.Visual computing for industry, biomedicine, and art · 2024Article
- Assessment of the Quality and Reliability of Content Available on YouTube About Palpitations.Cureus · 2024Article
- Article
- Polycystic Ovary Syndrome (PCOS): A Cross-Sectional Observational Study Analyzing the Quality of Content 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
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: More than 70 percent of the world's population is tortured with neck pain more than once in their vast life, of which 50-85% recur within 1-5 years of the initial episode. With medical resources affected by the epidemic, more and more people seek health-related knowledge Methods: We searched on YouTube using the keyword "neck pain" to include the top 50 videos by relevance, then divided them into five and seven categories based on their content and source. Each video was quantitatively assessed using the Journal of American Medical Association (JAMA), DISCERN, Global Quality Score (GQS), Neck Pain-Specific Score (NPSS), and video power index (VPI). Spearman correlation analysis was used to evaluate the correlation between JAMA, GQS, DISCERN, NPSS and VPI. A multiple linear regression analysis was applied to identify video features affecting JAMA, GQS, DISCERN, and NPSS. Results: The videos had a mean JAMA score of 2.56 (SD = 0.43), DISCERN of 2.55 (SD = 0.44), GQS of 2.86 (SD = 0.72), and NPSS of 2.90 (SD = 2.23). Classification by video upload source, non-physician videos had the greatest share at 38%, and sorted by video content, exercise training comprised 40% of the videos. Significant differences between the uploading sources were observed for VPI ( Conclusions: YouTube videos pertaining to neck pain contain low quality, low reliability, and incomplete information. Patients may be put at risk for health complications due to inaccurate, and incomplete information, particularly during the COVID-19 crisis. Academic groups should be committed to high-quality video production and promotion to YouTube users.
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.