ArticleBMC oral health2026
Navigating digital resources in dental education: a cross-sectional comparison of the educational quality of rubber dam videos on Youtube and Instagram.
Article in BMC oral health, 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
backgroundApplying a rubber dam (RD) is fundamental in both endodontic and restorative procedures to ensure a sterile working area, achieve optimal moisture control, and minimize microbial contamination. While platforms like YouTube and Instagram have become go-to resources for dental education, the actual quality of their content needs closer inspection. Therefore, this study sets out to assess how accurate and reliable the information on RD application techniques is across YouTube videos and Instagram Reels.
methodsSystematic searches for rubber dam application content were conducted on both platforms on January 18, 2026. After filtering, 39 relevant videos from each source were included. Three independent endodontists evaluated these videos using the Global Quality Scale (GQS), JAMA benchmarking criteria, and the modified Patient Educational Materials Evaluation Tool (mPEMAT). For statistical evaluation, Fleiss Kappa was used to check inter-rater reliability, Mann-Whitney U test was used to compare platforms, and Spearman correlation analysis (p < 0.05) was used.
resultsA strong consensus was observed among the observers; inter-rater reliability across all measures fell within the "good" to "excellent" categories (p < 0.001). YouTube significantly outperformed Instagram Reels, scoring higher on the GQS, JAMA, and mPEMAT scales (p < 0.001 for all). Content uploaded by dentists received the highest scores, regardless of the platform. Longer videos tended to have higher GQS and mPEMAT scores on both platforms.
conclusionIn this limited cross-sectional study, YouTube videos exhibited higher instructional quality and reliability scores compared to Instagram Reels. Rather than establishing an absolute superiority of one platform over the other, it appears that YouTube currently provides a more comprehensive learning resource.
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.