ArticleMedicine2026
Scientific quality of colonoscopy-related YouTube videos in the Turkish language.
Article in Medicine, 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Colonoscopy is the primary method for diagnosing colonic diseases and detecting precancerous lesions, thereby playing a crucial role in the prevention of colorectal cancer. However, the scientific quality and reliability of these videos require systematic assessment. In addition, the scientific quality of Turkish colonoscopy videos on YouTube remains unexplored. This study used internationally recognized scoring systems to assess the scientific quality of Turkish colonoscopy-related videos on YouTube. This cross-sectional study analyzed 156 Turkish-language YouTube videos on colonoscopy, with the inclusion criteria requiring a video duration between 30 seconds and 60 minutes. The main outcomes were video quality and information accuracy, which were measured using the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), modified DISCERN (mDISCERN) score, colonoscopy data quality (C-DQS), and Global Quality Score (GQS) tools. The study included 156 videos that fulfilled the inclusion criteria. According to the mDISCERN score, 24.4%, 59%, and 16.7% of the videos were of poor, fair, and good quality, respectively. Only 12.8% of the videos met the JAMA's quality criteria. The overall average score for each video source was low, with an average C-DQS score of 7.1/40. The JAMA, C-DQS, GQS, and mDISCERN scores for the videos designed to educate healthcare professionals were higher than those for videos designed for patient information or general culture/patient experience (P < .001 for each). Significant correlations were found between the JAMA score, mDISCERN score, GQS, and C-DQS (P < .001). Four independent quality assessment scales were used to evaluate Turkish-language YouTube videos on colonoscopy, with the results indicating suboptimal to moderate information quality. Online platforms, including YouTube, should implement strict quality control measures to ensure the accuracy of health-related videos.
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.