A cross-sectional study to evaluate uploader-based quality and reliability of content on YouTube about endometriosis

In: International Journal of Reproduction, Contraception, Obstetrics and Gynecology · 2024 · vol. 13(4) , pp. 848–852 · doi:10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20240776 · W4393315335
article OA: diamond CC0 ⤵ 1 in-corpus citation
AI-generated summary by claude@2026-06, 2026-06-09

This study evaluated 67 YouTube videos on endometriosis and found no significant difference in quality or reliability across content uploaded by doctors, organizations, news channels, or patients.

One-sentence paraphrase of the abstract; not a substitute for reading it. No clinical advice. How this works

Abstract

Background: Endometriosis is characterized by the development and presence of endometrial glands and stroma outside of the uterine cavity. Reflux of endometrial tissue fragments, cells, and protein-rich fluid into the pelvis during menstruation is considered the most important mechanism for the development of endometriosis, which is termed reflux menstruation. This study aims to assess quality and reliability of information on YouTube related to endometriosis. Methods: A cross-sectional observational study of YouTube videos was conducted in April 2023. Videos related to endometriosis were searched by six authors, easy using one search term. Relevant videos in English or Hindi language of duration 1-20 minutes were included in the study. These were evaluated for type of uploader, popularity, type of content and lastly quality and reliability using global quality score (GQS) and DISCERN scores respectively. Results: The 67 relevant videos conveying Endometriosis related information had 21,620,808 views, 120,830 likes and 11,655 comments. Around 31 (46.3%) of videos uploaded were by doctors and health care organizations, outnumbering those uploaded by news channels 14 (20.9%), patients 5 (7.5%), and others 17 (25.4%). 59 (88.06%) of these videos described symptoms of endometriosis, and 67.1% presented the cause or etiology. A total of 47 (70.1%) of videos discussed information regarding treatment options. Conclusions: YouTube videos have a wide reach among audience. In this study it was found that there was no significant difference in the quality, reliability or video power index (VPI) of videos uploaded by different types of uploaders. It is important to ensure that content with high quality and reliability is available from qualified medical professionals and organizations; for viewers to understand their disease and take treatment decisions.
Full text 4,857 characters · extracted from oa-doi-fallback · 5 sections · click to expand

Background

Endometriosis is characterized by the development and presence of endometrial glands and stroma outside of the uterine cavity. Reflux of endometrial tissue fragments, cells, and protein-rich fluid into the pelvis during menstruation is considered the most important mechanism for the development of endometriosis, which is termed reflux menstruation. This study aims to assess quality and reliability of information on YouTube related to endometriosis.

Methods

A cross-sectional observational study of YouTube videos was conducted in April 2023. Videos related to endometriosis were searched by six authors, easy using one search term. Relevant videos in English or Hindi language of duration 1-20 minutes were included in the study. These were evaluated for type of uploader, popularity, type of content and lastly quality and reliability using global quality score (GQS) and DISCERN scores respectively.

Results

The 67 relevant videos conveying Endometriosis related information had 21,620,808 views, 120,830 likes and 11,655 comments. Around 31 (46.3%) of videos uploaded were by doctors and health care organizations, outnumbering those uploaded by news channels 14 (20.9%), patients 5 (7.5%), and others 17 (25.4%). 59 (88.06%) of these videos described symptoms of endometriosis, and 67.1% presented the cause or etiology. A total of 47 (70.1%) of videos discussed information regarding treatment options.

Conclusions

YouTube videos have a wide reach among audience. In this study it was found that there was no significant difference in the quality, reliability or video power index (VPI) of videos uploaded by different types of uploaders. It is important to ensure that content with high quality and reliability is available from qualified medical professionals and organizations; for viewers to understand their disease and take treatment decisions. Metrics

References

Mehedintu C, Plotogea MN, Ionescu S, Antonovici M. Endometriosis still a challenge. J Med Life. 2014;7(3):349-57. Horne AW, Missmer SA. Pathophysiology, diagnosis, and management of endometriosis. BMJ. 2022;379:e070750. Nisenblat V, Prentice L, Bossuyt PM, Farquhar C, Hull ML, Johnson N. Combination of the non-invasive tests for the diagnosis of endometriosis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016;7(7):CD012281. Helming AG, Adler DS, Keltner C, Igelman AD, Woodworth GE. The Content Quality of YouTube Videos for Professional Medical Education: A Systematic Review. Acad Med. 2021;96(10):1484-93. Lee KN, Tak HJ, Park SY, Park ST, Park SH. YouTube as a source of information and education on endometriosis. Medicine (Baltimore). 2022;101(38):e30639. Sinnenberg L, Buttenheim AM, Padrez K, Mancheno C, Ungar L, Merchant RM. Twitter as a Tool for Health Research: A Systematic Review. Am J Public Health. 2017;107(1):e1-e8. Lee KN, Son GH, Park SH, Kim Y, Park ST. YouTube as a Source of Information and Education on Hysterectomy. J Korean Med Sci. 2020;35(25):e196. Steeb T, Reinhardt L, Harlaß M, Heppt MV, Meier F, Berking C. Assessment of the Quality, Understandability, and Reliability of YouTube Videos as a Source of Information on Basal Cell Carcinoma: Web-Based Analysis. JMIR Cancer. 2022;8(1):e29581. Charnock D, Shepperd S, Needham G, Gann R. DISCERN: an instrument for judging the quality of written consumer health information on treatment choices. J Epidemiol Community Health. 1999;53(2):105-11. Holowka EM. Mediating Pain: Navigating Endometriosis on Social Media. Front Pain Res (Lausanne). 2022;3:889990. Kaya C, Usta T, Baghaki HS, Oral E. Relation between educational reliability and viewer interest in YouTube® videos depicting endometrioma cystectomy surgical techniques. J Gynecol Obstet Hum Reprod. 2021;50(3):101808. Van den Haspel K, Reddington C, Healey M, Li R, Dior U, Cheng C. The role of social media in management of individuals with endometriosis: A cross-sectional study. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2022;62(5):701-6. Sinha R, Shibata R, Patel A, Sternchos JA. Social Media in Minimally Invasive Gynecologic Surgery: What Is #Trending on Instagram? J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2021;28(10):1730-4. Carneiro MM, Farace BL, Ribeiro LSC, Silverio RCCC, Moreira T, Filho ALDS, et al. Using social media to educate women and healthcare providers on endometriosis: preliminary results. JBRA Assist Reprod. 2020;24(1):9-12. Goel R, Modhukur V, Täär K, Salumets A, Sharma R, Peters M. Users' Concerns About Endometriosis on Social Media: Sentiment Analysis and Topic Modeling Study. J Med Internet Res. 2023;25:e45381.

Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below. Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy (via DOI) is the canonical version.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Ask this paper AI returns verbatim quotes from the full text · source: oa-doi-fallback

Answers must be backed by verbatim quotes from this paper's full text. Hallucinated quotes are dropped automatically; if no verbatim passage answers the question, we say so. How this works

Condition tags

endometriosis

Citation neighborhood

Papers in the corpus that this work cites (lower rings, blue) and that cite this one (upper rings, green). Dot size scales with the paper's in-corpus citation count — bigger dot = more influential within the endo/adeno field. Click a dot to open that paper. [ expand to 2 hops ] — adds papers reached through this work's immediate citers/citees. Heavier; up to 60 extra dots.

References (15)

Cited by (1)

Source provenance

openalex
last seen: 2026-06-04T00:00:01.174412+00:00
License: CC0 · commercial use OK