ArticleRheumatology international2025
Assessment of the quality and reliability of YouTube videos related to teleradiology in musculoskeletal and rheumatic diseases: a cross-sectional study.
Article in Rheumatology international, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Quality, Reliability, and Viewer Engagement of YouTube Videos on Esophageal Cancer: A Cross-Sectional Study.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- Quality and reliability of anxiety disorder-related short videos on TikTok and Bilibili: A cross-sectional study.Medicine · 2026Article
- Quality, reliability, and engagement of COPD-related videos on Chinese short-form video platforms: a cross-sectional content analysis.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Cross-sectional analysis of the reliability and engagement metrics of YouTube videos on semaglutide for weight loss.Medicine · 2026Article
- Views vs. reliability : a cross-sectional analysis of reliability and risk discussion in YouTube anesthesia videos.BMC anesthesiology · 2026Article
- Analysis of YouTube videos on rheumatic diseases and pregnancy: a cross-sectional study.Rheumatology international · 2026Article
- Social media platforms for ethical post-publication promotion.Clinical rheumatology · 2026Article
- Assessment of the quality and reliability of public health communication about hypertension on short video platforms in China.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- A Comparison of Artificial Intelligence Platforms in the Utility of Answering Frequently Asked Questions About Carpal Tunnel Syndrome: A Cross-Sectional Study.Journal of hand surgery global online · 2025Article
- Publication activity trends in the field of social media in rheumatology: a Web of Science-based bibliometric analysis.Rheumatology international · 2025Article
- Educational performance of TikTok short videos for age related macular degeneration and its link to user engagement.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Assessment of the most popular short videos about hemorrhoids on Chinese TikTok: A cross-sectional study.Digital healthArticle
- Quality and reliability of myasthenia gravis-related short videos on TikTok and Bilibili: A cross-sectional study.Digital healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Teleradiology, the remote evaluation of medical images using digital communication technologies, has altered healthcare delivery, particularly in musculoskeletal and rheumatic disorders. This article aims to assess YouTube videos regarding teleradiology in these disorders. The video inspection was conducted on January 15, 2025, using the search terms "teleradiology musculoskeletal system," "teleradiology rheumatic diseases," "teleradiology rheumatology," and "teleradiology arthritis".A total of 200 videos were evaluated. Total views, likes and comments, video duration, time since upload, and daily engagement metrics were recorded. The videos were categorized based on their origin. The evaluation tools utilized to analyze each video were the Global Quality Scale (GQS), Modified DISCERN Questionnaire, JAMA Benchmark Criteria, and Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool for Audio/Visual Materials (PEMAT-A/V). Of the 44 videos, 20.4% (n = 9) were of low quality, 27.3% (n = 12) were of intermediate quality, and 52.3% (n = 23) were of high quality. Physicians (81.8%) and nonprofit organizations (66.7%) were the predominant producers of high-quality videos. In contrast, health-related websites (29.4%) and nonacademic healthcare institutions (28.6%) constituted the primary sources of poor content. The quality groups showed significant differences in daily views and likes (p < 0.05), with high-quality videos receiving the highest engagement. Significant correlations were detected between video duration and content assessment tools (p < 0.01). The current results emphasize the need to select high-quality videos from reliable sources such as physicians and nonprofit organizations. Considering YouTube's extensive use as a source of medical information, it is essential to advocate for expert-driven, high-quality content to augment its educational efficacy.
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.