Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40163648›Full record

ArticleJMIR infodemiology2025

Breast Cancer Vlogs on YouTube: Descriptive and Content Analyses.

Nina Morena, Elly Dimya Htite, Yitzchok Ahisar, Victoria Hayman, Carrie A Rentschler, Ari N Meguerditchian

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR infodemiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Nina MorenaDepartment of Art History and Communication Studies, McGill University, McCall McBain Arts Building, Room 155, 853 Sherbrooke Street West, Montreal, QC, H3A 0G5, Canada, 1 514-398-2850.ORCID 0000-0001-6904-478X
Elly Dimya HtiteFaculty of Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.ORCID 0009-0002-5143-2615
Yitzchok AhisarDepartment of Surgery, General Surgery, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-5215-1201
Victoria HaymanDepartment of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-0324-716X
Carrie A RentschlerDepartment of Art History and Communication Studies, McGill University, McCall McBain Arts Building, Room 155, 853 Sherbrooke Street West, Montreal, QC, H3A 0G5, Canada, 1 514-398-2850.ORCID 0000-0002-2073-0559
Ari N MeguerditchianDepartment of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-4798-8135

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Many women with breast cancer document their experiences in YouTube vlogs, which may serve as peer-to-peer and community support. Objective: This study aimed to determine (1) the forms of content about breast cancer that tend to be discussed in vlogs, (2) the reasons why women choose to vlog their breast cancer experiences, and (3) the potential for breast cancer vlogs to serve as an alternative or complement to peer-to-peer support as well as a site of digital community overall. Methods: YouTube was searched in incognito mode in November 2023 using the search terms "breast cancer vlog." A maximum of 10 videos/creator were included based on viewership and date created. Video characteristics collected included title; length; number of views, likes, comments; and playlist inclusion. Videos were assessed for sponsorship; presence of explanation and discussion on breast cancer; type of content; and themes. Creator characteristics included age, location, and engagement approaches. Descriptive and content analyses were performed to analyze video content and potential areas where peer-to-peer support may be provided. Results: Ninety vlogs by 13 creators were included, all from personal accounts. The mean (SD) video length, number of views, and number of comments were 21.4 (9.1) minutes, 266,780 (534,465), and 1485 (3422), respectively. Of the 90 videos, 35 (39%) included hashtags, and 11 (12%) included paid sponsorships. The most common filming location was the home (87/90; 97%), followed by the hospital (28/90; 31%) and car (19/90; 21%). Home vlogs were most often set in the living room (43/90; 44%), bedroom (32/90; 33%), or kitchen (20/90; 21%). Thirty-four of 60 videos (57%) included treatment visuals and physical findings. Creators addressed motivation for vlogging in 44/90 videos (49%); the two most common reasons were wanting to build a community and helping others. In 42/90 videos (47%), creators explicitly expressed emotion. Most common themes were treatment (77/90; 86%), mental health (73/90; 81%), adverse effects (65/90; 72%), appearance (57/90; 63%), and family relationships (33/90; 37%). Patient-directed advice was offered in 52/90 videos (58%), mostly on treatment-related issues. In 51/90 videos (57%), creators provided explicit treatment definitions. Chemotherapy was discussed in 63/90 videos (70%); surgery in 52/90 (58%), primarily mastectomy; radiation in 27/90 (30%); and general adverse effects in 64/90 (71%). Twenty-two of 90 videos (24%) were about a new diagnosis. When mentioned (40/90; 44%), the most common creator location was the United States. When mentioned (27/90; 30%), the most common age was 20-29 years. Conclusions: The dedication to building community support by vlog creators, and the personal nature of their storytelling, may make vlogs a potential resource for peer-to-peer support.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsSocial MediaVideo RecordingAdultFemaleHumansMiddle AgedPeer GroupSocial Supportbreastbreast cancer vlogcancercontent analysisdescriptive analysisexperienceoncologysocial mediavideowomenYouTube

Identifiers

PMID40163648
PMCPMC11975118

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.