ArticleRevista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992)2023
Do YouTube videos on microscopic varicocelectomy provide reliable information?
Article in Revista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to assess the quality of YouTube videos about microscopic varicocelectomy.
methodsOn November 20, 2022, a YouTube search for "Microscopic Varicocelectomy" was conducted. Non-English videos uploaded by producers for commercial purposes that lacked audio and subtitles were excluded from the study. A total of 50 videos were evaluated using the Journal of the American Medical Association Benchmark Score and the Global Quality Score, both of which are recognized internationally. Additionally, the researcher developed the Microscopic Varicocelectomy Score to evaluate the videos' technical content. The upload source, video length, number of views, likes, dislikes, and video power indexes were evaluated.
resultsThe Global Quality Score, Journal of the American Medical Association Benchmark Score, and Microscopic Varicocelectomy Score of the academically prepared videos were significantly higher than those of the physician-prepared videos (p<0.05). The Global Quality Score, Journal of the American Medical Association Benchmark Score, and Microscopic Varicocelectomy Score of uploaded videos with audio, audio, and subtitles were significantly higher than those with only subtitles (p<0.05). The video duration was positively correlated with Journal of the American Medical Association Benchmark Score, Global Quality Score, and Microscopic Varicocelectomy Score. The video power index had a strong positive correlation with the number of likes. Moreover, a strong positive correlation was observed, indicating that the Global Quality Score and Journal of the American Medical Association Benchmark Score increased as the Microscopic Varicocelectomy Score increased.
conclusionYouTube videos regarding microscopic varicocelectomy were of notably low quality. If the video content created by specialist physicians and academic centers is more meticulously organized, more accurate data can be transmitted. Consequently, viewing video content may not be advised based on the available data.
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.