ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2023
Mental Health of Prostate Cancer Patients: Content Review on YouTube
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 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
- Article
- Trends in suicide mortality among prostate cancer survivors in the United States, 1975-2019.BMC public health · 2024Article
- Preferences for Tailored Support - Patients' and Health Care Professionals' Experiences Regarding Symptoms and Self-Management Strategies During the First Year After Curatively Intended Prostate Cancer Treatment.Patient preference and adherence · 2024Article
- Incidence and Predicting Factors of Histopathological Features at Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy in the mpMRI Era: Results of a Single Tertiary Referral Center.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 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
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this study is to evaluate YouTube™ content in terms of the quality of information available about prostate cancer (PCa) in relation to incidence, symptomatology, and potential treatments for patients' mental health. We searched on YouTube™ for terms related to mental health combined with those relating to prostate cancer. Tools for audio-visual-content PEMAT A/V, Global Quality Score, and DISCERN score were applied for the assessment of videos' quality. A total of 67 videos were eligible. Most of the analyzed YouTube™ videos were created by physicians (52.2%) in contrast to other author categories (48.8%). According to the PEMAT A/V, the median score for Understandability was 72.7% and the overall median score for Actionability was 66.7%; the median DISCERN score was 47, which correspond to a fair quality. Only videos focusing on the topic "Psychological Effects and PCa treatment" were significantly more accurate. The General Quality Score revealed that the majority of YouTube™ videos were rated as "generally poor" (21, 31.3%) or "poor" (12, 17.9%). The results suggest that the content of YouTube™ videos is neither exhaustive nor reliable in the current state, illustrating a general underestimation of the mental health of prostate cancer patients. A multidisciplinary agreement to establish quality standards and improve communication about mental health care is needed.
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.