SynthesisJournal of orthopaedic surgery and research2025
Evaluating the quality of osteonecrosis and avascular necrosis content on youtube: a multidimensional analysis using DISCERN, JAMA, and GQS tools.
Synthesis in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Quality, Reliability, and Viewer Engagement of YouTube Videos on Esophageal Cancer: A Cross-Sectional Study.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- YouTube as a Reliable Source of Patient Education for Peyronie's Disease: A Quality Assessment Study.Cureus · 2026Article
- #KneeOsteotomy: Evaluation of the Quality and Educational Value of TikTok Videos.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2026Article
- Epistemic compression in large language model explanations of the gut-liver axis.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2026Article
- A cross-cultural comparison of educational video quality on college students' anxiety and depression: a cross-sectional content analysis of YouTube and Bilibili.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Quality and reliability of semaglutide content on different Chinese short video platforms: a study focusing on side effects.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- #Cartilage: TikTok Videos on Cartilage Surgery Demonstrate Low Quality and Limited Educational Value.Cartilage · 2025Article
- Cross-platform assessment of short-form video quality on the gut-liver axis: informational integrity and engagement disparity.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2025Article
- A cross-sectional study of the quality and reliability of renal cell carcinoma-related short videos on Bilibili and TikTok.Digital healthArticle
- Article
- Viewer Engagement Patterns in Advanced Procedural and Patient-Facing Orthopedic YouTube Videos: A Seven-Year Single-Channel Cross-Sectional Analysis.Inquiry : a journal of medical care organization, provision and financingArticle
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
backgroundOsteonecrosis, or avascular necrosis (AVN), is a degenerative bone disorder caused by insufficient blood supply, primarily affecting weight-bearing joints. With increasing reliance on platforms like YouTube for health information, evaluating the quality of content related to AVN is crucial to prevent misinformation. This study aims to assess the quality and educational value of YouTube videos on AVN.
methodsA systematic search was conducted on November 17, 2024, using the terms "avascular necrosis" and "osteonecrosis." From an initial pool of 143,000 videos, 70 relevant videos were selected based on specific inclusion criteria. Two orthopedic surgeons independently reviewed these videos, assessing various characteristics and categorizing them by content and the uploader's background. The quality was evaluated using the DISCERN score, JAMA criteria, and Video Power Index (VPI). Inter-rater reliability was assessed using Intraclass Correlation Coefficients (ICC), which yielded a value of 0.903 (95% CI: 0.856 to 0.937), indicating nearly perfect agreement among reviewers.
resultsThe mean video length was 11.6 ± 16.5 min, with a total view count averaging 23,087 ± 46,868. The mean DISCERN, JAMA, and GQS scores were 45.7 ± 13.9, 2.6 ± 0.7, and 3.0 ± 0.9, respectively. Videos uploaded by doctors had slightly higher quality scores, but overall, many videos were rated as average or poor. A significant positive correlation was found between the VPI and quality scores (p < 0.05), while older videos tended to have lower quality scores.
conclusionsHealth-related videos on platforms like YouTube frequently do not meet high-quality standards, despite some differences in assessments. This emphasizes the need for better quality control and standardization in health content production. Collaboration among medical professionals, content creators, and platforms can significantly enhance online health education quality.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.