ArticlePloS one2024
YouTube as an information source for bleeding gums: A quantitative and qualitative analysis.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Gum bleeding is a common dental problem, and numerous patients seek health-related information on this topic online. The YouTube website is a popular resource for people searching for medical information. To our knowledge, no recent study has evaluated content related to bleeding gums on YouTube™. Therefore, this study aimed to conduct a quantitative and qualitative analysis of YouTube videos related to bleeding gums. A search was performed on YouTube using the keyword "bleeding gums" from Google Trends. Of the first 200 results, 107 videos met the inclusion criteria. The descriptive statistics for the videos included the time since upload, the video length, and the number of likes, views, comments, subscribers, and viewing rates. The global quality score (GQS), usefulness score, and DISCERN were used to evaluate the video quality. Statistical analysis was performed using the Kruskal-Wallis test, Mann-Whitney test, and Spearman correlation analysis. The majority (n = 69, 64.48%) of the videos observed were uploaded by hospitals/clinics and dentists/specialists. The highest coverage was for symptoms (95.33%). Only 14.02% of the videos were classified as "good". The average video length of the videos rated as "good" was significantly longer than the other groups (p <0.05), and the average viewing rate of the videos rated as "poor" (63,943.68%) was substantially higher than the other groups (p <0.05). YouTube videos on bleeding gums were of moderate quality, but their content was incomplete and unreliable. Incorrect and inadequate content can significantly influence patients' attitudes and medical decisions. Effort needs to be expended by dental professionals, organizations, and the YouTube platform to ensure that YouTube can serve as a reliable source of information on bleeding gums.
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.