ArticleDigital health
YouTube
Article in Digital health. 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.
- The quality and reliability of short videos about uraemia on BiliBili and TikTok: a cross-sectional study.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Evaluating tonsillectomy-related YouTube videos via a human expert review and the ChatGPT-4: a multi-method quality analysis.BMC medical education · 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
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD) is the most common inherited kidney disease in adults. As a social media platform, YouTube has tremendous potential to both support and hinder public health efforts. The aim of this study was to assess the reliability and quality of the most viewed English-language YouTube videos on ADPKD. Methods: A YouTube search was conducted on 3 August 2023, using the keyword ADPKD disease and the top 200 videos were analyzed for relevance. Videos in the "Short" category that were duplicates, were not in English, were not audio or visual, and contained advertisements were excluded. Two reviewers divided the 159 included videos into groups based on their source and content. Results: In 106 (66.7%) of the 159 videos, general information about the disease was given, 58 (36.5%) discussed medical treatment, 11 (6.9%) discussed surgical treatment, 30 (18.9%) included patient images and radiological images, and eight (5%) discussed the genetic and pathological features of the disease. Additionally, 16 (10.1%) videos fell into the "other" category. According to the Journal of the American Medical Association, Quality Criteria for Consumer Health Information and Global Quality Scale scoring systems, videos uploaded by health associations and foundations received the highest scores (3 (1-4), 54 (28-70), 4 (1-5), respectively). Conclusion: Academic institutions and other official health organizations such as Health Associations/Foundations need to use YouTube more effectively to disseminate accurate, reliable and useful health-related information to society.
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.