Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36763146›Full record

ArticleInternational urogynecology journal2023

Evaluation of robotic-assisted sacrocolpopexy videos on YouTube.

Cihat Özcan, Adem Sancı

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International urogynecology journal, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Quality and reliability of YouTube videos on fascial sling surgery.Revista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992) · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Cihat ÖzcanDepartment of Urology, Gulhane Training and Research Hospital, University of Health, Sciences Turkey, Ankara, Turkey. dr.cihatozcan@gmail.com.
Adem SancıKızılcahamam State Hospital, UROLOGY Department, Kızılcahamam, Turkey.
Sivas State Hospital · TR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo evaluate the quality and reliability of videos on YouTube about robotic-assisted sacrocolpopexy.

methodsYouTube's search function was used to find videos associated with robotic-assisted sacrocolpopexy. On June 1, 2022, systematic research was performed using the term "robotic-assisted sacrocolpopexy". The first 50 videos were included in the study. The quality of the videos was evaluated using the Global Quality Scale (GQS) [a 5-point scale: high quality (4 or 5), acceptable quality (3), low quality (1 or 2)]. The modified DISCERN scale was used to evaluate the reliability of the videos [a 5-point scale: high reliability (5), moderate reliability (3 and 4), low reliability (1 or 2)].

resultsA total of 50 videos associated with robotic-assisted sacrocolpopexy were analyzed. The most frequently discussed topics in the videos were the duration of the surgery (72%), the anatomical success rates (70%), the advantages and disadvantages of the procedure compared to the classical methods (68%), and the postoperative complications (60%). The mean GQS of the videos was 3.04 ± 0.75. The mean DISCERN score of the videos was 2.21 ± 1. No appropriate references were cited in any of the videos. There was no video that received a full score (5 points) from DISCERN.

conclusionOur study shows that the level of quality in YouTube videos associated with robotic-assisted sacrocolpopexy is at an acceptable and high level, but its reliability is low. Therefore, short and concise videos that contain accurate information and refer to scientific facts should be prepared by urogynecology associations.

Indexed as

Robotic Surgical ProceduresSocial MediaHumansPostoperative ComplicationsReproducibility of ResultsRoboticSacrocolpopexyYouTube

Identifiers

PMID36763146
OpenAlexW4319812907

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.