ArticleJournal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education2025
Quality Assessment of Videos about Radiotherapy-Related Oral Mucositis on YouTube in Brazil.
Article in Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education, 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This cross-sectional study evaluated the quality of information on radiotherapy-related oral mucositis (OM) available on the YouTube platform in Brazil. The first 200 videos retrieved using the keywords "boca ferida radioterapia" were analyzed, excluding those shorter than 1 min, longer than 15 min, or unrelated to the topic. Technical data was collected, and six variables were assessed: definitions of head and neck cancer, radiotherapy, and OM; along with OM frequency, symptoms, and prevention/treatment options. Videos were categorized as 'poor' (score 1-2 on ≥ 1 variable), 'average' (score 3 on all variables), or 'good' (score 4-5 on ≥ 1 variable with no scores 1 or 2). Of the 104 videos analyzed, 51.0% were produced by doctors and 85.6% were aimed at the lay public. Most videos lasted 1-9 min (87.5%), with 10,001-100,000 views (32.0%), ≤ 1,000 likes (54.4%), and ≤ 100 comments (66.3%). Overall, 10.6% (n = 11) were classified as 'poor' due to the presence of misinformation. An additional 32.7% (n = 34) were rated 'average' for failing to address any of the assessed variables. The majority, 56.7% (n = 59), were rated 'good' as they provided at least one accurate and comprehensive information and contained no misinformation. While few videos on radiotherapy-related OM in Brazil presented incorrect information, a significant number were incomplete. This highlights an opportunity to improve the content to provide the public with more comprehensive information.
Identifiers
41359214What 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.