ArticleJMIR formative research2025
Didactic and Content Quality of Basic Life Support Videos on YouTube: Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in JMIR formative research, 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
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is vital for improving patient outcomes in medical emergencies. Both laypersons and health care professionals often seek guidance on performing CPR. In today's digital age, many turn to easily accessible platforms such as YouTube for practical skills. Objective: This study evaluates the didactic and content quality of CPR videos on YouTube using comprehensive checklists and investigates the association between the assigned quality scores and type of publisher, view count, and video rankings. Methods: Videos were included based on defined search terms and exclusion criteria. Two emergency physicians rated each video independently using validated checklists concerning content and didactic quality. Linear regression analysis was performed to assess the relationships between video quality scores and view counts, as well as video rankings. Results: Of the 250 videos identified, 74 (29.6%) met the inclusion criteria. On the content checklist, videos scored an average of 56.5% (SD 19.2%), and on the didactic checklist, they scored 66.6% (SD 14.3%); none achieved the maximum score. Videos from official medical institutions scored significantly higher in content quality compared to nonofficial sources (P=.04). Video quality scores were not associated with video rankings or view counts. Conclusions: The study highlights substantial variability in the didactic and content quality of CPR-related videos on YouTube. For medical educators, this underlines the need to curate and recommend reliable online resources or to develop new high-quality content aligned with established checklists. For the general public, the findings caution against relying on popularity metrics as indicators of accuracy and emphasize the importance of guidance from trusted institutions.
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.