ArticleCureus2023
YouTube as a Source of Information on Pilonidal Sinus Disease: A Reliability and Quality Analysis.
Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
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
Aim This study aimed to assess the quality and reliability of the information in YouTube videos regarding pilonidal sinus disease (PSD). Methods A total of 100 most-viewed videos on PSD were included in the analysis by two general surgeons. Video duration and content, date of upload, qualification of the video uploaders, and number of daily and total view, like, and comment counts were analyzed. We grouped the videos as those uploaded by healthcare professionals and non-professionals. The quality of the video contents was assessed with the Global Quality Scale (GQS) and the reliability of the video content with the DISCERN scoring system. Results Eighty-five (85%) videos were uploaded by professionals and 15 (15%) videos by laypersons. The average DISCERN score of the reviewed video contents was 3.18 ± 1.23, and the average GQS score was 3.39 ± 1.24. In the overall subjective evaluation, the mean DISCERN value was found as 4.01 ± 1.24 and the mean GQS value as 4.25 ± 1.25 in the useful videos. The mean DISCERN value was found as 2.32 ± 1.22 and the mean GQS value as 2.48 ± 1.25 in the misleading videos. Conclusion Our results showed that most of the YouTube videos on PSD were loaded by healthcare professionals. However, the mean quality and reliability scores were lower in videos uploaded by laypersons. Given the prevalence of PSD, physicians should be promoted for uploading accurate and professional video contents to direct patients to the right solutions for their problems.
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.