ArticleBMC medical education2025
Assessing the usefulness of educational videos on endodontic irrigation for dental students: a pilot study.
Article in BMC medical 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThis research aimed to assess the usefulness of existing YouTube videos on endodontic irrigation, published between January 2013 and December 2022, as a learning resource for dental undergraduate students. Additionally, the study evaluated the educational value of these videos about factors such as video duration, authorship source, and view count.
methodsYouTube searches for videos related to endodontic irrigation were conducted using search terms such as "irrigation protocol" and "endodontic irrigation." After screening, ninety-six videos were selected and assessed based on factors such as days since upload, video duration, number of views and likes, authorship source, and viewing rate. A set of six parameters was established to evaluate the educational value of the videos, with each element being assigned a score of 0 or 1. Statistical analyses were performed using the Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney tests, with a significant level of 5%.
resultsThe videos received an average of 4,474.76 views, 38.67 likes, a 290.5% viewing rate, and a video length of 161.15 s. The mean usefulness score was 3.89, with the most discussed elements being demonstration, description, and equipment/apparatus. The majority of videos were from healthcare professionals (n = 73, 76.04%) or commercial sources (n = 22, 22.92%). Twenty-seven videos were classified as highly useful, sixty-one as moderately useful, and eight as low usefulness. Among the content usefulness categories, the highly useful videos had the shortest length (mean = 158.93s), while the moderately useful videos had the highest viewing rate. Videos uploaded by different authorship sources showed minimal statistical significance in content usefulness.
conclusionsThe usefulness of endodontic irrigation videos on YouTube has low educational value, and the available data to assess their effectiveness as a learning tool for undergraduate students is inconclusive.
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.