ArticleRevista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992)2026
Systematic analysis of the scientific quality, reliability, and educational value of Vaginal Natural Orifice Transluminal Endoscopic Surgery videos on YouTube.
Article in Revista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992), 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe aim of this study was to evaluate the scientific quality, reliability, and educational value of YouTube videos on Vaginal Natural Orifice Transluminal Endoscopic Surgery using structured assessment tools.
methodsThis cross-sectional study analyzed 20 YouTube videos on Vaginal Natural Orifice Transluminal Endoscopic Surgery identified using the keywords "Vaginal Natural Orifice Transluminal Endoscopic Surgery," "Vaginal Natural Orifice Transluminal Endoscopic Surgery hysterectomy," "vaginal natural orifice endoscopic surgery," and "transvaginal NOTES." Two obstetrics and gynecology specialists independently evaluated the videos using the Global Quality Scale, modified DISCERN, and Journal of the American Medical Association benchmarks. Analyses included non-parametric group comparisons, Spearman correlation, multiple linear regression, and intraclass correlation coefficient analysis.
resultsThe median number of views was 2,565 (interquartile range: 13,322). The mean Global Quality Scale, modified DISCERN, and Journal of the American Medical Association scores were 4.17±0.94, 3.95±0.84, and 2.65±0.93, respectively. Inter-rater agreement was moderate for Global Quality Scale and modified DISCERN and good for Journal of the American Medical Association. A statistically significant difference by channel type was observed only for modified DISCERN scores. Although Global Quality Scale scores were moderately correlated with likes (ρ=0.565, p=0.009), multiple linear regression showed no independent association between popularity or technical quality variables and quality scores (p>0.05).
conclusionVaginal Natural Orifice Transluminal Endoscopic Surgery videos on YouTube may provide valuable educational content; however, popularity metrics do not reflect scientific reliability. Video selection for surgical education should be based on structured quality assessment tools rather than view count alone.
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.