Quality and Reliability of YouTube Videos on Orbital Fractures: A Cross-Sectional Content Analysis.

Authors

Mehmet Omer Kiristioglu, Semih Ozmen

Published in

The Journal of craniofacial surgery. Aug 19, 2026. Epub Aug 19, 2026.

Abstract

YouTube is widely used as a source of medical information, but the educational value of videos on orbital fractures remains unclear. This cross-sectional content analysis evaluated the quality, reliability, and orbital fracture-specific completeness of YouTube videos. YouTube was searched on April 3, 2026, using "orbital fracture," "blowout fracture," and "orbital floor fracture." After duplicate removal and predefined exclusions, 123 English-language videos were included. Two ophthalmologists independently assessed each video using DISCERN, Journal of the American Medical Association benchmark criteria, Global Quality Score, and an orbital fracture-specific score. Inter-rater reliability ranged from moderate to excellent. Overall quality was moderate but heterogeneous, with median DISCERN, JAMA, GQS, and OFSS scores of 46.0, 1.5, 3.5, and 3.5, respectively. Medical professional/institutional videos had higher JAMA and OFSS than nonmedical videos in unadjusted analyses, although after false discovery rate adjustment, only the OFSS difference remained significant. Across content categories, differences in DISCERN and OFSS remained significant after adjustment, with surgical/academic videos showing the highest scores. In exploratory multivariable models, video duration remained independently associated with all 4 quality scores, while professional/institutional source and surgical/academic content were most consistently associated with OFSS. Most popularity metrics were not associated with quality; view count, daily viewing rate, and Video Power Index showed weak associations only with JAMA score. YouTube videos on orbital fractures provide only moderate, inconsistent information, and popularity should not be taken as a proxy for educational value.

PMID:
42627977
Bibliographic data and abstract were imported from PubMed on 22 Aug 2026.

Read full publication at:
Please sign in to see all details.

Stats

1-terrible, 9-excellent. How would you rate this publication? Sign in in to submit your rating.

Post a comment

You need to be signed in to post comments. You can sign in here.

Comments

There are no comments yet.