ArticleInternational journal of colorectal disease2025
Robotic ventral rectopexy videos on youtube: reliability of quality and educational value assessment among raters with different degrees of surgical experience.
Article in International journal of colorectal disease, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Comparing surgical outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic or open ileal pouch-anal anastomosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeRobotic ventral rectopexy (RVR) has gained acceptance as a minimally invasive approach for treating rectal prolapse and rectocele. Although numerous surgical videos have been published, their educational quality remains underexplored. This study aimed to evaluate the overall quality, adherence to reporting guidelines, and educational value of the most-viewed RVR videos on YouTube, as rated by surgical trainees, fellows, and senior surgeons.
methodsThe 25 most-viewed YouTube videos on RVR were selected and assessed for adherence to LAP-VEGaS and consensus reporting guidelines, overall quality, and educational value. Surgeons' performance was evaluated using the Global Evaluative Assessment of Robotic Skills (GEARS) scale. A Bayesian ordinal regression model analyzed factors influencing video quality and utility ratings.
resultsVideo quality and educational value varied significantly among viewer groups. Only 40% of videos underwent peer review before publication. Adherence to reporting guidelines was low (median conformity rate: 13.5%-16.7%). Inter-rater reliability differed across GEARS domains, with senior surgeons rating video quality and utility more critically than trainees and fellows. Videos with more likes and shorter online duration were more likely to be rated as high-quality.
conclusionsOnline surgical videos on RVR offer easily accessible but potentially unreliable educational resources and exhibit significant variability in quality and guideline adherence. Structured, peer-reviewed video-based educational programs and standardized reporting practices are crucial for improving the educational impact of online surgical videos.
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.