ArticleArthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation2025
YouTube Videos on Osteochondral Allograft Transplantation Lack Accuracy and Quality.
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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate the accuracy and informational quality of YouTube videos related to osteochondral allograft (OCA) transplantation as a potentially valuable educational resource for patients and health care professionals. Methods: A systematic analysis of YouTube videos retrieved through a predefined search strategy using the key words "osteochondral allograft" was performed. Videos were categorized by content sources, such as health care professionals with and without commercial bias, individuals, or personal testimonials. The video's duration, the publication date, and number of likes and views were recorded. To evaluate the accuracy, reliability and quality of video content, each video was assessed using the Results: In total, 80 YouTube videos were included. Overall, the quality of OCA-related YouTube videos was low, with mean scores of 2.16 (JAMA), 2.28 (GQS), 32.58 (DISCERN), and 5.71 (OCA-QAL). Only one video was rated as "excellent" on OCA-QAL, and none achieved full points on JAMA or GQS. Video categories included educational content with (27.5%) or without (51.3%) commercial bias for health care professionals, content for nonhealth care individuals (13.8%), and testimonials (7.5%). Strong positive correlations emerged between OCA-QAL, GQS, and DISCERN scores, whereas views and likes did not predict quality. Conclusions: YouTube videos on OCA transplantation generally do not meet the quality standards like peer-reviewed validation necessary for reliable patient education. Given the low quality of available content, health care providers should be cautious in recommending YouTube as a resource for OCA transplantation information and should guide patients to more rigorously reviewed resources. Clinical Relevance: As cartilage procedures like OCA transplantation become more common, surgeons and patients lack reliable online resources. This study underscores the need for improved digital health content to ensure accurate and trustworthy patient education.
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.