SynthesisObesity surgery2024
Development and Evaluation of a Quality Assessment Tool for Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy Videos: A Review and Comparison of Academic and Online Video Resources.
Synthesis in Obesity surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty video annotation: analysis of the learning curve of three annotators to achieve procedure proficiency.International journal of surgery (London, England) · 2026Article
- Quality and educational value of youtube videos on inguinal hernia surgery: a cross-sectional study.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2026Article
- Article
- Development of an evaluation framework for robotic total mesorectal excision videos: a review and comparison of medical professional and public video resources.International journal of colorectal disease · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundVideo recording of surgical procedures is increasing in popularity. They are presented in various platforms, many of which are not peer-reviewed. Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) videos are widely available; however, there is limited evidence supporting the use of reporting guidelines when uploading LSG videos to create a valuable educational video. We aimed to determine the variations and establish the quality of published LSG videos, in both peer-reviewed literature and on YouTube, using a newly designed checklist to improve the quality and enhance the transparency of video reporting.
methodsA quality assessment tool was designed by using existing research and society guidelines, such as the Bariatric Metabolic Surgery Standardization (BMSS). A systematic review using PRISMA guidelines was performed on MEDLINE and EMBASE databases to identify video case reports (academic videos) and a similar search was performed on the commercial YouTube platform (commercial videos) simultaneously. All videos displaying LSG were reviewed and scored using the quality assessment tool. Academic and commercial videos were subsequently compared and an evidence-based checklist was created.
resultsA total of 93 LSG recordings including 26 academic and 67 commercial videos were reviewed. Mean score of the checklist was 5/11 and 4/11 for videos published in articles and YouTube, respectively. Academic videos had higher rates of describing instruments used, such as orogastric tube (P < 0.001) and stapler information (P = 0.04). Fifty-four percent of academic videos described short-term patient outcomes, while not reported in commercial videos (P < 0.001). Sleeve resection status was not universally reported.
conclusionsVideos published in the academic literature are describing steps in greater detail with more emphasis on specific technical elements and patient outcomes and thus have a higher educational value. A new quality assessment tool has been proposed for video reporting guidelines to improve the reliability and value of published video research.
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.