Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42350598›Full record

ArticleLasers in medical science2026

Evaluating the educational quality and reliability of YouTube videos on red light therapy for eye diseases.

Elvin Çelenk, Işıl Merve Torun

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Lasers in medical science, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Elvin ÇelenkDepartment of Ophthalmology, Yalova University, Yalova, Turkey. elvinhalili@gmail.com.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0005-6779-0312
Işıl Merve TorunDepartment of Ophthalmology, Sultan 2. Abdülhamid Han Eğitim ve Araştırma Hastanesi, Istanbul, Turkey.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To investigate the use of YouTube videos as an educational and informational resource regarding the use of red light therapy in eye diseases. On May 1, 2025, a comprehensive search was conducted on the YouTube platform ( https://www.youtube.com ) using the keywords "Red light therapy in eye disease" and "Use of red light therapy in eye diseases for patient information". Videos under 60 s in duration, those lacking audio, duplicate entries, irrelevant content, and videos with disabled comment sections were excluded from the analysis. These exclusion criteria were predefined prior to data collection. Following video selection (E.Ç., M.T.), all videos were independently evaluated by two ophthalmologists, and statistical analyses were performed using the finalized dataset. Parameters assessed included total views, number of comments, likes, time elapsed since upload, video duration, view rate, interaction index, video source, and content characteristics. In addition, videos were categorized according to quality level based on Global Quality Score (GQS) scores as low-to-moderate quality (GQS < 4) and high quality (GQS ≥ 4). Comparisons were then performed according to quality category with respect to uploader source, video purpose, and engagement-related parameters. Out of 110 YouTube videos reviewed, 53 were excluded based on predefined criteria. The remaining 57 videos covered myopia (22.8%), dry eye (33.3%), diabetic retinopathy (12.3%), and age-related macular degeneration (31.6%). Inter-rater agreement was high (mDISCERN ICC: 0.952; JAMA ICC: 0.923; GQS ICC: 0.890). Videos uploaded by physicians had significantly higher mDISCERN, JAMA, and GQS scores. Educational videos had higher mDISCERN and JAMA scores than patient-information videos. A moderate positive correlation was found between the number of likes and the interaction index (r = 0.458, p < 0.01). The interaction index was not significantly associated with mDISCERN, JAMA, or GQS scores, indicating that engagement metrics were not reliable indicators of informational quality. Among disease categories, age-related macular degeneration videos had the highest mean quality scores, although the differences were not statistically significant. Most videos were classified as low-to-moderate quality (82.5%), while 17.5% were classified as high quality. High-quality videos had significantly higher view counts and like counts than low-to-moderate quality videos. The overall quality and formal reliability of YouTube videos on red light therapy in ophthalmology were low to moderate. Physician-uploaded and educational videos provided higher-quality information. Although high-quality videos showed greater engagement, popularity metrics were not reliable indicators of informational quality. More evidence-based and accessible video content is needed to support patient education.

Indexed as

Eye DiseasesOphthalmologyPatient Education as TopicSocial MediaVideo RecordingHumansRed LightReproducibility of ResultsEye diseaseRed light therapyScoring systemsYouTube

Identifiers

PMID42350598
PMCPMC13303309

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.