ArticleBMC public health2024
YouTube as a source of recognizing acute stroke; progress in 2 years.
Article in BMC public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Diagnostic Performance of the BE-FAST-V Scale for Detecting Strokes in the Emergency Department: A Prospective Cohort Study.Open access emergency medicine : OAEM · 2026Article
- Quality Analysis of Stroke-Related Videos on Video Platforms: Cross-Sectional Study.JMIR formative research · 2025Article
- BiliBili, Douyin and Xiaohongshu as health information platforms for stroke: evaluating information quality and content.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- The Quality and Reliability of Online Videos as an Information Source of Public Health Education for Stroke Prevention in Mainland China: Electronic Media-Based Cross-Sectional Study.JMIR infodemiology · 2025Article
- Stroke 1-2-0-3-6: rapid identification and timely action for stroke in China.Frontiers in neurology · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundYouTube™ has a great role in providing information, which includes educational videos, to more than 2 billion users, making it the second most popular application in the world. BE-FAST is a modified version of the FAST mnemonic and is used to detect acute ischemic stroke by the patients or their relatives. The purpose of this study is to assess the overall usefulness of the information of YouTube in patients to realize an acute stroke attack.
methodsYouTube was searched for the following five terms: "stroke", ''stroke diagnosis", "stroke signs", "brain attack" and "what is stroke" in November 2021 and May 2023, separately. Two independent neurology specialists scored each video by using Global Quality Scale (GQS).
resultsAmong the total of 150 videos, the number that met inclusion criteria was 91 for the November 2021 search and 104 for the May 2023 search. For the 2021 search, in 30 videos (33%), the FAST mnemonic or its contents were noticed, whereas BE-FAST was mentioned in only four videos (4.4%). For the 2023 search, the FAST mnemonic or its contents were noticed in 36 videos (34.6%) and BE-FAST was mentioned in 11 videos (10.6%). Among the 2021 and 2023 searches, the mean GQS values were 3.09 and 2.96 points, 50 (54.8%) vs. 56 (53.8%) videos rated 3.5 points or higher (high quality), respectively. GQS scores of the videos mentioning balance, eyes, face, arms, speech, and time, the basic and advanced information about radiology and treatment, and mentioning FAST, BE-FAST, and TPA were significantly higher.
conclusionWe conclude that YouTube is not yet a very useful tool for patients to realize that they may have acute ischemic stroke, though over the years; information available on social media for healthcare information and education has improved.
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.