ArticleFrontiers in public health2026
Functional neurological disorder on YouTube: how reliable is the information?
Article in Frontiers in public health, 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.
- YouTube Videos as Educational Resources for Seizure Clusters and Treatment Options: Cross-Sectional Observational Study.JMIR infodemiology · 2026Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Functional Neurological Disorder (FND) is a common and often misunderstood condition characterized by neurological symptoms such as limb weakness, movement disorders, sensory disturbances, and non-epileptic seizures that are not explained by structural neurological disease. Patients increasingly seek information through digital platforms such as YouTube; however, the reliability and educational value of such content remain uncertain. Objective: This study aimed to systematically evaluate the quality, reliability, and educational value of English-language YouTube videos on FND using standardized assessment tools. Methods: A cross-sectional analysis was conducted on the 50 most viewed videos retrieved with relevant keywords. Video characteristics and engagement metrics were recorded. Quality was assessed using the Global Quality Scale (GQS), reliability with the modified DISCERN (mDISCERN), and health information standards with JAMA benchmark criteria. User interaction was measured via the Video Power Index (VPI). Statistical analyses included Spearman correlation, Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U tests, with effect sizes reported. Inter-rater reliability was evaluated using ICC and weighted Cohen's kappa. Results: The mean GQS, mDISCERN, and JAMA scores were 3.27, 3.23, and 2.38, respectively, indicating moderate overall quality but suboptimal adherence to health information standards. Producer type did not significantly affect quality scores ( Conclusion: YouTube hosts a substantial amount of FND-related content; however, overall quality and reliability are inconsistent. Engagement metrics do not reliably reflect informational accuracy. Given the stigma and complexity of FND, reliance on unregulated online content may hinder patient understanding and management. Greater involvement of clinicians and professional organizations in producing evidence-based, patient-centered digital resources is warranted to improve health literacy and outcomes.
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.