ArticleArthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation2025
Bias Toward Surgical Treatment of Acromioclavicular Injuries Exists on YouTube.
Article in Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate the quality and comprehensiveness of videos regarding acromioclavicular dislocation posted on the YouTube platform and to evaluate potential reinforcement of misinformation that may hinder proper management of these injuries. Methods: A YouTube search was performed in November 2024 using key words "acromioclavicular joint dislocation." Videos were ranked on relevance and the first 50 videos that met inclusion criteria were analyzed by 2 reviewers. Video source, content type, time since upload, video duration, number of views, likes, subscribers and comments were recorded. Video educational quality was measured using the modified DISCERN, Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) score, Global Quality Score and Shoulder-Specific Score (SSS). Quality scores from different sources and content categories were compared using the Kruskal-Wallis test. Strength of relationship between variables was assessed using Spearman's rank correlation coefficient. Results: In total, 209,005 videos were identified of which the first 50 videos were analyzed. Mean mDISCERN, JAMA, GQS and SSS were 2.19, 2.13, 2.48, and 6.26, respectively. The most common uploader source were physicians (28%) and the most common content category was surgical management (32%). Videos uploaded by an academic source had significantly higher mDISCERN, JAMA, and SSS ( Conclusions: Current YouTube video content about AC dislocations has low overall quality, despite being mostly uploaded by physicians. It does not provide sufficient information and potentially reinforces misinformation that may downplay potential benefits of nonsurgical interventions. Clinical Relevance: Given the widespread use of YouTube by patients seeking medical information, evaluating the quality of this content is essential for surgeons to better understand and address the information their patients may encounter.
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.