ArticleAnatomical sciences education2026
Evaluating the quality and educational utility of YouTube videos in teaching human surface anatomy.
Article in Anatomical sciences education, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Quality, Reliability, and Viewer Engagement of YouTube Videos on Esophageal Cancer: A Cross-Sectional Study.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- Educational quality of ocular and orbital anatomy videos on YouTube: a student- and patient-centered evaluation.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Stratified and combined analysis of the quality of lumbar spinal stenosis-related videos on major Chinese short video platforms.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
YouTube is increasingly used by medical and health science students as a supplementary learning tool. However, the quality and educational value of surface anatomy videos on YouTube remain underexplored. This study aimed to systematically evaluate the quality, reliability, and educational usefulness of YouTube videos focusing on human surface anatomy. A structured YouTube search was conducted (December 2024-January 2025), targeting the seven primary body regions with specific keywords (e.g., "surface anatomy," "bone landmarks," and "dermatomes"). The top 30 videos per search term were selected. Two anatomists independently assessed each video using the Anatomy Content Score (ACS), Global Quality Scale (GQS), modified DISCERN (mDISCERN), and Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmarks. Inter-observer agreement was evaluated via Kappa coefficient. Associations between video quality scores and YouTube metrics (view count, like ratio, interaction index) were examined using nonparametric tests. Among 1050 retrieved videos, 85 (8%) met inclusion criteria; 48 (56.5%) were classified as "useful" (ACS ≥ 13, GQS ≥ 4). Longer video duration was significantly (p < 0.001) associated with higher usefulness, whereas view count, like ratio, and interaction index did not correlate with usefulness. ACS strongly correlated with GQS (r
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.