ArticleCanadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada2025
Evaluating quality, understandability, and actionability of YouTube content for gender-affirming surgery.
Article in Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe purpose of this study is to evaluate YouTube content about metoidioplasty on completeness of perioperative information, actionability, understandability, degree of misinformation, quality, and presence of commercial bias.
methodsA YouTube search for "Metoidioplasty" was conducted and the first 100 video results were watched by five independent reviewers. Videos in English, <30 minutes in length were included and videos primarily showing surgical footage were excluded. Videos were evaluated between January 2022 and June 2022. Each video was evaluated for presenter demographics, channel/video statistics, and whether it covered topics including anatomy, treatment options, outcomes, procedure risks, and misinformation, and whether it had a clickbait title. Calculated scores for validated DISCERN and patient education materials assessment tool (PEMAT) metrics were the primary outcome variables used to quantify quality, actionability, and understandability. For PEMAT, a cutoff of 75% was used to differentiate between "poor" vs. "good/sufficient." Multivariate and univariate logistic regressions were performed to assess correlations among primary outcome variables and other variables.
resultsOf the 79 videos analyzed, 24% (n=19) were of high quality; 99% (n=78) had poor understandability and 100% (n=79%) had poor actionability. Patients/consumers were the most common publisher type (n=71, 90%).
conclusionsThis study demonstrates metoidioplasty content available on YouTube is not comprehensive and is of poor quality, and poor actionability and understandability, demonstrating a clear need for more relevant, accessible, comprehensible, and accurate content.
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.