ArticleJMIR formative research2025
Pro- and Antifluoride Use Messages on YouTube in Japan: Content Analysis.
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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Dental caries is one of the most prevalent chronic conditions globally. In Japan, fluoride application-mainly via toothpaste, mouth rinses, and professional treatments-is a key preventive measure, as community water fluoridation is not implemented. Despite its proven effectiveness, fluoride use faces opposition from certain groups citing potential health risks. Social media platforms, especially YouTube, have become major sources of health information, but also facilitate the spread of misinformation, which may influence public perceptions and behaviors toward fluoride use. Objective: This study aimed to analyze YouTube videos addressing fluoride use for caries prevention, focusing on the types of information presented and comparing the messages shared by proponents and opponents of fluoride use. Methods: A comprehensive search was conducted on YouTube using fluoride-related keywords in Japanese. The top 50 videos for each keyword were screened, and after excluding irrelevant or duplicate content, 86 videos were analyzed. Videos were categorized as proponent ("pro"), opponent ("anti"), or others. The sources, intended audiences, and content themes were assessed. Interrater reliability was confirmed using the Cohen κ coefficient. Results: Of the 86 analyzed videos, 58% (n=50) were categorized as "pro," 22% (n=19) as "anti," and 20% (n=17) as others. Proponent videos, mainly produced by dental professionals, emphasized scientific evidence, such as the mechanism of fluoride in preventing caries and guideline-based recommendations. Opponent videos, largely uploaded by laypersons, highlighted potential dangers of fluoride, including health risks and additives, and frequently promoted fluoride-free products. Opponent videos had higher daily viewership and engagement than proponent videos. Conclusions: Anti-fluoride content on YouTube appears to reach broader audiences than expert-generated profluoride videos. Opponent messages tend to use emotionally charged communication, whereas proponents focus on scientific information. These differences in style may influence public perceptions of fluoride use. Public health professionals should develop engaging and accessible communication strategies to counter misinformation and promote evidence-based practices.
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.