ReviewScientific reports2023
A content analysis of YouTube videos on tinnitus in South Korea.
Review in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Beliefs about pain and lived experience of chronic pain among Korean Americans in the community: A qualitative study.The journal of pain · 2026Article
- Article
- Is YouTube a reliable source of current information and education about urodynamics? A cross-sectional analysis.BMC urology · 2025Article
- Evaluating the quality of medical content on YouTube using large language models.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Assessment of the content and quality of YouTube videos on retinopathy of prematurity: a cross-sectional study.Arquivos brasileiros de oftalmologia · 2025Article
- Effectiveness of Computer-Mediated Educational Counseling for Tinnitus Relief: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Brain sciences · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
More people use the internet for medical information, especially YouTube. Nevertheless, no study has been conducted to analyze the quality of YouTube videos about tinnitus in Korea. This study aims to review the contents and quality of YouTube videos on tinnitus. The top 100 Korean YouTube videos on tinnitus were reviewed by a tinnitus expert. This study assessed video details: title, creator, length, and popularity indicators-subscribers, views, and likes. The contents of the video clips were analyzed to determine the relevance, understandability, actionability, and quality of information. Out of 100 tinnitus videos, 27 were created by otolaryngologists, 25 by traditional Korean medicine doctors, 25 by other medical professionals, and 3 by lay persons. Sensorineural tinnitus was frequently dealt, and hearing loss, stress, and noise were introduced as main causes of tinnitus. Otolaryngologists' videos covered verified treatments, but others suggested unproven therapies including herbal medicine or acupressure. Otolaryngologists' videos showed significantly higher understandability and quality of information compared to others (p < 0.001). This study found that tinnitus YouTube videos frequently present low-quality and incorrect material, which could have an adverse effect on patients. Results highlight the need for tinnitus specialists to provide accurate information.
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.