ArticleCureus2023
YouTube as a Patient Information Source for Gastrointestinal Reflux Disease.
Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cross-sectional analysis of the quality of hemodialysis short videos on TikTok.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Evaluating the Quality and Reliability of YouTube Videos Providing Nutritional Recommendations for Irritable Bowel Syndrome.Journal of human nutrition and dietetics : the official journal of the British Dietetic Association · 2025Article
- Article
- The status quo of short video as sources of health information on gastroesophageal reflux disease in China: a cross-sectional study.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
- Video Quality Assessment and Analysis of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease on TikTok and Bilibili: Cross-Sectional Study.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 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
6 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) affects a substantial portion of the global population, resulting in significant morbidity and impacting the quality of life. YouTube (YouTube, San Bruno, California) serves as a platform where medical professionals, individuals with personal experiences, and educational channels share their insights on GERD. However, with the vast amount of information available on YouTube, the question of credibility and reliability is a concern and, thus, is crucial to evaluate. This research paper aims to explore the impact of YouTube as a source of information on GERD. The aim of this study is to assess the quality and reliability of the information on YouTube about GERD. Methodology This cross-sectional observational study was conducted in June 2023. A questionnaire was designed using Google Forms (Google, Mountain View, California) with predetermined criteria such as characteristics of YouTube videos (time since uploaded, uploader, number of likes and comments); information about GERD (symptoms, investigations, treatment); and quality and reliability of information on YouTube about GERD using Global Quality Scale (GQS) and Reliability score. The Kruskal-Wallis Test was used to evaluate the difference in quality and reliability of information about GERD on YouTube based on the type of uploader. Results Out of 90 videos analyzed, 68 YouTube videos on GERD that met inclusion criteria were included in the study. The number of videos uploaded by hospitals was 28 (41.2%), those by doctors was 12 (17.6%), and the remaining by others (like pharmacists, patients, and non-medical personnel) was 28 (41.2%). A significant proportion of videos (88.24%) shared information pertaining to disease symptoms and cause/etiology. The videos uploaded by "others" had significantly higher (p<0.05) reach as assessed by the Video Power Index (VPI) compared to those uploaded by doctors and hospitals. However, there was no significant difference (>0.05) in the quality and reliability of videos uploaded by doctors, hospitals, and other sources. Conclusion Although the YouTube videos uploaded by doctors and hospitals had less reach among viewers compared to other uploaders (patients, news agencies, pharmaceutical companies, and others unrelated to healthcare), the quality and reliability of videos uploaded by doctors, hospitals, and other uploaders were of good quality and reliability and with no significant difference based on type of uploader. Healthcare organizations and government agencies should ensure that viewers have access to accurate and reliable information from social media like YouTube, which is crucial in their health decision-making.
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.