ArticleEndocrine connections2024
Assessment of the quality, content, and reliability of YouTube® videos on diabetes mellitus and polycystic ovary syndrome: a systematic review with cross-sectional analysis comparing peer-reviewed videos.
Article in Endocrine connections, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- A cross-sectional analysis of the quality and reliability of Wilson disease videos on Bilibili, Douyin, and Kuaishou.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Health information-seeking behavior among women with polycystic ovary syndrome: A scoping review protocol.PloS one · 2026Article
- Quality Assessment of Shock Videos on Video Sharing Platforms: Cross-Sectional Study.JMIR formative research · 2025Article
- Assessing quality, reliability and accuracy of polycystic ovary syndrome-related content on TikTok: A video-based cross-sectional analysis.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2025Article
- YouTube as a Source of Information for Dietary Guidance and Advisory Content in the Management of Non-Alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Article
- The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the quality and reliability of smoking cessation videos on YouTube: a comparative study across three pandemic periods.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- YouTube as a Source of Information in Trauma Management for ATLS (10th Edition) Guidelines: Evaluation of Trauma Management Videos on YouTube.Emergency medicine international · 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
YouTube® is one of the leading platforms for health information. However, the lack of regulation of content and quality raises concerns about accuracy and reliability. CoMICs (Concise Medical Information Cines) are evidence-based short videos created by medical students and junior doctors and reviewed by experts to ensure clinical accuracy. We performed a systematic review to understand the impact of videos on knowledge and awareness about diabetes and PCOS. We then evaluated the quality of YouTube® videos about diabetes and PCOS using various validated quality assessment tools and compared these with CoMICs videos on the same topics. Quality assessment tools like DISCERN, JAMA benchmark criteria, and global quality scale (GQS) score were employed. Some of the authors of this study also co-authored the creation of some of the CoMICs evaluated. Our study revealed that while videos effectively improve understanding of diabetes and PCOS, there are notable differences in quality and reliability of the videos on YouTube®. For diabetes, CoMICs videos had higher DISCERN scores (CoMICs vs YouTube®: 2.4 vs 1.6), superior reliability (P < 0.01), and treatment quality (P < 0.01) and met JAMA criteria for authorship (100% vs 30.6%) and currency (100% vs 53.1%). For PCOS, CoMICs had higher DISCERN scores (2.9 vs 1.9), reliability (P < 0.01), and treatment quality (P < 0.01); met JAMA criteria for authorship (100% vs 34.0%) and currency (100% vs 54.0%); and had higher GQS scores (4.0 vs 3.0). In conclusion, CoMICs outperformed other similar sources on YouTube® in providing reliable evidence-based medical information which may be used for patient education.
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.