ArticlePeerJ2025
The quality and reliability of YouTube video content about gingival recession on different time periods.
Article in PeerJ, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Gingival recession is a mucogingival problem that can cause esthetic concerns and sensitivity. While some patients remain unaware of it, others seek solutions through various means. The COVID-19 pandemic has increased the role of social media in accessing health information. The frequent use of YouTube has prompted researchers to evaluate its contents quality and reliability. This study aims to examine this issue by comparing two periods: before and after COVID-19. Methods: The first 100 videos for the keyword 'receding gums' shared in 2019 and 2024 were analyzed. A total of 23 and 35 videos were included, respectively. Quality was evaluated using Video Quality Index (VIQI) and Global Quality Scale (GQS), reliability with DISCERN and Modified DISCERN and content through an approach developed by the authors. Videos were also assessed based on their characteristics and sources. Data were analyzed using IBM SPSS 26.0. For two-group comparisons, independent sample Results: According to content analysis, useful videos were found to have higher scores of quality and reliability indices in both the 2019 and 2024 groups (
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.