ArticleCureus2026
Assessing the Quality of YouTube Videos About Cannabinoid Hyperemesis Syndrome.
Article in Cureus, 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.
- Evaluating the quality of educational TikTok videos on diabetic retinopathy: a cross-sectional study.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy, completeness, and clinical usefulness of YouTube (Alphabet Inc., Mountain View, CA) videos about cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome (CHS). Methods This cross-sectional study assessed YouTube videos that were identified using standardized CHS-related search terms and predefined eligibility criteria. Trained reviewers used an author-developed CHS content checklist and a global usefulness scale for each video, with any discrepant or complex cases resolved by medical toxicologists. Outcomes included accuracy across key CHS domains, overall clinical usefulness, and the association between video quality and basic engagement metrics. Results A total of 97 videos were analyzed, with a mean length of 9.8 minutes and a cumulative view count of 795,264. Only 25.8% of videos were rated as useful and 2.1% as exemplary, whereas 52.6% were rated not useful and 19.6% as misleading due to missing essential content and/or unsubstantiated claims. Personal testimonial videos were common and often combined accurate symptom descriptions with speculative etiologies and non-evidence-based management advice. Engagement metrics showed little meaningful association with reviewer-rated accuracy or usefulness, and several of the most-viewed videos contained substantial misinformation. Interrater agreement for key classifications was substantial (κ = 0.78). Conclusions CHS-related information on YouTube shows considerable variation in quality, and most videos provide incomplete or inaccurate guidance regarding diagnosis and management. Patients relying on these videos may encounter persuasive narratives that normalize symptoms or promote ineffective or harmful management strategies rather than encouraging cannabis cessation and medical evaluation. Clinicians should anticipate that patients have likely been exposed to such content, directly address misconceptions, and guide them toward vetted educational resources. High-quality, expert-developed CHS content is needed to improve the reliability of information available on social media platforms.
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.