ArticlePalliative care and social practice2024
A content analysis of YouTube videos on palliative care: understanding the quality and availability of online resources.
Article in Palliative care and social practice, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluating the quality and reliability of youtube videos on Hirschsprung's disease: a comprehensive analysis for patients, parents and health professionals.Pediatric surgery international · 2025Article
- Assessing the quality, reliability, and transparency of YouTube videos on spiritual palliative care: a content analysis.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Improvement in quality care is an important aspect of palliative care for individuals with serious illnesses. Palliative care is a multidisciplinary strategy that addresses the physical, emotional, social, and spiritual needs of patients and their families. As technology advances, digital media - especially YouTube - has come to serve as a virtual educational platform, offering resources for health-related information, including information about palliative care. Objectives: In this research, the main goal was to evaluate the quality and availability of online resources related to palliative care. Design: Two theoretical frameworks were used: the Health Communication Model and the Information Quality Framework. These frameworks offer a way to understand how YouTube videos contribute to palliative care information and assess the quality of that information. Methods: This study utilizes a quantitative analysis approach to assess the quality and accessibility of YouTube videos on palliative care. Specifically, a random sample of 300 YouTube videos addressing palliative care was examined. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the data, including the frequency and distribution of the different types of content, sources, and quality indicators. Chi-square tests were done to compare the quality of information provided by different sources and types of content. Results: The results showed a variety of video types, with educational videos being the most common (40%), followed by personal stories (26.7%) and promotional videos (16.7%). We found that healthcare organizations (30%) and individual content creators (46.7%) were the sources for these videos. Conclusion: There were varying scores in terms of accuracy, completeness, and relevance when it came to quality assessment. While many videos received excellent ratings, some received poor ratings. Additionally, this analysis revealed that the majority of these videos were in English (83.3%), which poses a limitation for non-English speakers who may have difficulty understanding them.
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.