ArticleBMC oral health2026
Quality and reliability Of YouTube videos on maxillofacial infections: a cross-sectional study.
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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to evaluate the quality, reliability, and content level of maxillofacial infection-related videos on YouTube. MATERIALS AND
methodsA total of 101 videos meeting the predefined inclusion criteria were analyzed. The videos were independently evaluated by two researchers in terms of content scope, quality (Global Quality Scale, GQS), reliability (modified DISCERN and JAMA criteria), and user engagement metrics.
resultsThe overall quality and reliability of the videos were low to moderate. The mean GQS score was 2.96 ± 0.71, reflecting an overall moderate level of video quality. The content predominantly focused on etiology, clinical findings, and diagnosis, whereas information regarding treatment was relatively limited. As the number of views, likes, and comments increased, the quality and reliability tended to decrease; conversely, longer video duration was associated with higher quality and more comprehensive content. Videos uploaded by healthcare professionals and institutions were found to be more reliable.
conclusionThe quality of maxillofacial infection-related videos on YouTube is variable, with particularly insufficient coverage of treatment-related information. Popular videos are not necessarily reliable. Therefore, there is a clear need for more accurate and comprehensive content.
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.