ArticleJournal of Korean medical science2023
Evaluation of YouTube Videos on Hepatocellular Carcinoma.
Article in Journal of Korean medical science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Quality of Cancer-Related Information on New Media (2014-2023): Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Pooled it
- Quality assessment of public education short videos on robot-assisted cholecystectomy and analysis of audience preferences.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Quality and reliability of pediatric inguinal hernia treatment information on TikTok and Bilibili.BMC pediatrics · 2026Article
- Article
- Content, quality, and reliability of gout-related videos on TikTok and Bilibili: A cross-sectional study.Medicine · 2026Article
- Quality and reliability of femoral neck fracture educational short videos: a cross-sectional study.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Analysis of YouTube videos on rheumatic diseases and pregnancy: a cross-sectional study.Rheumatology international · 2026Article
- Evaluating the Quality and Reliability of YouTube as a Source of Information on Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation: A Call to Publish More Quality Videos by Professionals.Journal of Korean medical science · 2025Article
- YouTube as a source of information for stroke rehabilitation: a cross-sectional analysis of quality and reliability of videos.Rheumatology international · 2025Article
- Assessment of the quality and reliability of YouTube videos related to teleradiology in musculoskeletal and rheumatic diseases: a cross-sectional study.Rheumatology international · 2025Article
- YouTube as a Source of Information on Public Health Ethics.Journal of Korean medical science · 2024Article
- Quality and Reliability of Liver Cancer-Related Short Chinese Videos on TikTok and Bilibili: Cross-Sectional Content Analysis Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Article
- Article
- The quality and reliability of short videos about thyroid nodules on BiliBili and TikTok: Cross-sectional study.Digital healthArticle
- Article
- Quality and reliability of rectal prolapse short-video content on tiktok and bilibili: A cross-sectional content analysis.Digital healthArticle
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAs in every field, online information has become increasingly used in health. However, it is well known that some information online containing health advice is incorrect and may even include false statements. For this reason, it is crucial for public health that individuals reach reliable, high-quality resources when they are trying to obtain health information. Studies have been conducted on the quality and reliability of online information about many diseases, but no similar study has been found in the literature on hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).
methodsIn this descriptive study, videos on YouTube (www.youtube.com) about HCC were evaluated using the Global Quality Scale (GQS) and the modified DISCERN tool.
resultsWhile 129 (89.58%) of the videos examined within the study were considered useful, 15 (10.42%) were misleading. The GQS scores of the videos considered useful were significantly higher than the scores of the misleading videos, with a median (min-max) score of 4 (2-5) (
conclusionYouTube should be considered a complex structure where accurate and reliable health information can be presented, as well as erroneous and misleading information. Users should understand the importance of video sources and focus their research on videos from doctors, academics, and universities.
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.