ArticleClinical parkinsonism & related disorders2025
Evaluating YouTube as a source of information on hemifacial spasm.
Article in Clinical parkinsonism & related disorders, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Bladder exstrophy on YouTube: an evaluation of quality, actionability, and user engagement.World journal of urology · 2026Article
- YouTube as an educational resource: Evaluating the quality and reliability of videos for family caregivers of persons living with Alzheimer's disease dementia.Journal of Alzheimer's disease reportsArticle
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
Background and Objectives: Patients increasingly turn to YouTube for trustworthy health-related information, prompting a study to evaluate the quality and reliability of videos about hemifacial spasms (HFS) available on the platform. Materials and Methods: In August 2024, a systematic search was conducted using a formal strategy to identify relevant videos. Two independent neurology resident physicians reviewed each video, scoring it with the validated modified DISCERN (mDISCERN) tool for reliability and the Global Quality Scale (GQS) for content quality. Videos were categorized based on their purpose and assessed for video/audio quality, accuracy, comprehensiveness, and procedure-specific content. Results: The study included 44 videos. According to GQS, 17 (38.6 %) were rated as high quality, 14 (31.8 %) as good, 5 (17 %) as medium, and 8 (18.2 %) as poor quality. On the mDISCERN scale, 24 (54.5 %) were deemed reliable, while 9 (20.5 %) were unreliable. Videos created by physicians, academic institutions, and reputable health information websites scored higher on both mDISCERN and GQS compared to other sources. A strong positive correlation was found between mDISCERN and GQS scores (r = 0.925, p < 0.001), indicating that higher reliability was linked to better content quality. Conclusion: YouTube offers valuable resources for HFS patients and caregivers. Videos produced by healthcare professionals and academic institutions offered particularly accurate insights, enhancing patients' understanding of the condition's pathophysiology and treatment options, and serving as a useful complement to healthcare professionals' knowledge. Healthcare professionals and academic institutions have a pivotal role in creating and promoting high-quality educational content. Future efforts should focus on increasing the availability of reliable, expert-verified videos to improve overall quality of information accessible to patients.
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.