ArticleInvestigative and clinical urology2026
Educational value of supine versus prone percutaneous nephrolithotomy videos on YouTube: A comparative analysis.
Article in Investigative and clinical urology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
purposeThe integration of video-based learning into surgical education highlights the need for high-quality instructional content, especially for complex procedures such as percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL). This study aimed to systematically evaluate and compare the educational quality of YouTube videos demonstrating supine and prone PCNL techniques. MATERIALS AND
methodsA comprehensive YouTube search was conducted between January 6 and 19, 2025, using the keywords "supine PCNL," "prone PCNL," "supine percutaneous nephrolithotomy," and "prone percutaneous nephrolithotomy." Eligible videos were assessed using three validated scoring systems: Global Quality Score (GQS), the DISCERN instrument (a validated tool for assessing the quality of health information), and the JAMA (
resultsSupine PCNL videos demonstrated significantly higher DISCERN reliability scores (p=0.037), GQS scores (p=0.001), and PCNL-Edu Scores (p=0.018) compared to prone PCNL videos. Subgroup analyses showed no significant differences in educational quality based on video source (academic/individual) or video type (educational/surgical demonstration). In correlation analyses, video length positively correlated with PCNL-Edu Scores in both groups (prone: p=0.004, supine: p=0.001), whereas popularity metrics such as views (prone: p=0.069, supine: p=0.061) and likes (prone: p=0.183, supine: p=0.225) were not significantly associated with educational quality.
conclusionsSupine PCNL videos currently offer superior instructional quality on YouTube. The PCNL-Edu Score provides a focused framework for evaluating surgical videos and underscores the need for standardized guidelines to improve video-based surgical education.
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.