Size matters: characterizing penile augmentation content from the 100 most popular YouTube videos.

Nicolas Seranio, Wade Muncey, Shanice Cox, Federico Belladelli, Francesco Del Giudice, Frank Glover, Michael L Eisenberg

Abstract read

PubMed Publisher

In one paragraph

Article in International journal of impotence research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it

0cells of the map it votes in

1citing papers in PubMed

0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 27% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

YouTube as a source of information on retrograde ejaculation: insights into content reliability.International journal of impotence research · 2026
Article

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Nicolas SeranioDepartment of Urology, School of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA. nseranio@stanford.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8951-9842

Wade MunceyDepartment of Urology, School of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.

Shanice CoxTCU School of Medicine, Fort Worth, TX, USA.

Federico BelladelliDepartment of Urology, School of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.

Francesco Del GiudiceDepartment of Urology, University Sapienza, Rome, Italy.

Frank GloverGangarosa Department of Environmental Health, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA.

Michael L EisenbergDepartment of Urology, School of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.

Stanford University · USEmory University · USSapienza University of Rome · ITStanford Medicine · USVita-Salute San Raffaele University · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Aesthetic penile augmentation is considered investigational and not shown to be safe or efficacious. This study sought to characterize the quality and reliability of YouTube videos on the topic of penile augmentation. A systematic search identifying the 100 most viewed YouTube videos on penile augmentation was conducted. The videos were then evaluated by two independent urologists for reliability and quality using a modified DISCERN scoring system and Global Quality Scale (GQS). The median total views were 530,612 (range 123,478-32,914,713). The median DISCERN and GQS scores for all 100 videos were generally poor at 1.75 (IQR 1-2.63) and 2.5 (IQR 1.5-3.5), respectively. A little under half of the videos had a physician present (44.7%). DISCERN and GQS scores were significantly higher in videos with physicians compared to those without one (p < 0.001 for both). The majority of videos discussed nonsurgical methods of penile augmentation (65.1%) with penile traction devices being the most frequently discussed (19.2%). Urologists and medical organizations should strive to have more of a presence in this space to ensure patients are appropriately educated and counseled before pursuing potentially ineffective or harmful treatments.

Indexed as

PenisSocial MediaVideo RecordingHumansMale

Identifiers

PMID37380757

DOI10.1038/s41443-023-00728-y

OpenAlexW4382396718

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.