ArticleCureus2026
YouTube as a Source of Water Birth Information: An Analysis of Gaps, Misalignments, and Adherence With American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) Guidelines.
Article in Cureus, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Water birth is increasingly popular, yet debates persist regarding its safety and efficacy. There is a need to assess the accuracy and sentiment of publicly available water birth content, and it is essential that water birth content be accurate to support informed decision-making. Objective To identify whether certain YouTube video characteristics play a role in determining whether the contents of the video are aligned with the published recommendations set forth by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Materials and methods An analysis of the top 100 English-language YouTube videos on "water birth" sorted by "most viewed" was conducted on March 9, 2023. After applying inclusion and exclusion criteria, a final set of videos met the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. Video characteristics were recorded. Video accuracy was assessed against 16 ACOG water birth guidelines. Scores: 1 (accurate), 0 (not mentioned), or -1 (inaccurate). Transcripts were analyzed using MonkeyLearn Sentiment Analyzer to determine sentiment. Results Of the videos analyzed, the majority were neutral in their accuracy, while a smaller proportion were deemed accurate or contained inaccuracies. Critical safety topics, such as umbilical cord avulsion or neonatal infection risks, were almost universally omitted. Videos created by healthcare professionals demonstrated greater accuracy, while personal vlogs were predominantly neutral. Sentiment analysis revealed that most videos conveyed a negative sentiment, followed by positive and then neutral sentiment. Notable geographic disparities were observed, with North American content exhibiting greater emotional polarization compared to international content. Conclusion Most widely viewed YouTube content on water birth lacks alignment with ACOG guidelines, particularly regarding risk communication, posing misinformation risks.
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.