ArticleAllergy, asthma, and clinical immunology : official journal of the Canadian Society of Allergy and Clinical Immunology2025
The origin of YouTube videos on hereditary angioedema matters.
Article in Allergy, asthma, and clinical immunology : official journal of the Canadian Society of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHereditary angioedema (HAE) is a rare, potentially life-threatening condition that requires accessible and reliable information. YouTube has emerged as a significant source of health-related content, offering valuable insights while posing the risk of misinformation that warrants caution among users. The aim of this study was to evaluate the popularity, reliability, understandability, actionability, and overall quality of YouTube videos related to HAE.
methodA search was conducted on YouTube using the term "hereditary angioedema." Videos were categorized based on their origin (health or nonhealth) and content type (medical professional education (MPE), patient education (PE), patient experience, or awareness). The quality, reliability, understandability, and actionability of the videos were assessed via the Global Quality Scale (GQS), the Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool for Audiovisual Materials (PEMAT-A/V), and the Quality Criteria for Consumer Health Information (DISCERN) tool. Three independent allergists evaluated the videos.
resultsOut of 135 reviewed videos, 111 met the inclusion criteria. The health group presented significantly higher scores than did the nonhealth group in several metrics: PEMAT-A/V understandability (83, IQR: 56-92, p = 0.001), total DISCERN score (37, IQR: 3-45, p < 0.001), reliability (23, IQR: 19-26, p < 0.001), treatment (15, IQR: 8-21, p = 0.007), and modified DISCERN score (3, IQR: 2-4, p = 0.002). Health videos were uploaded more recently (p = 0.006), while awareness videos tended to be older than more recent MPE videos (p = 0.002). The MPE videos had the longest duration, whereas the awareness videos had the shortest duration (p < 0.001). Video quality scores, assessed via the GQS, were higher in both the MPE and PE groups (scores: 3, 4, and 5; p = 0.005). Compared with the other groups, the MPE group also had significantly higher PEMAT-A/V understandability scores (91, IQR: 70.75-92, p < 0.001), total DISCERN scores (40, IQR: 30.75-49.5, p < 0.001), reliability scores (24, IQR: 21-27.25, p < 0.001), and overall scores for moderate to high quality (83, 74.8%, p = 0.002).
conclusionYouTube videos on HAE uploaded by health care professionals generally offer higher-quality information, but their overall reliability remains suboptimal. There is a pressing need for higher-quality, trustworthy content, particularly from professional medical organizations, to address this gap.
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.