Skip to content
DraconiticResearch
Search Sources API
203,234 studies31 sourcesUpdated 44 min ago
Peer-reviewedCC BY 4.0Frontiers in Public Health

Quality and reliability of cancer- and tumor-related videos on YouTube: a scoping review

  • Jianjie Zhang1,2
  • Lu Xu1,2
  • Yu Fu1
  • Yajuan Wang1
  • Fangping Shi3
  • Tao Shi2,4,5
5 affiliations
  1. 1School of Nursing, Kunming Medical University
  2. 2The Third Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University
  3. 3Department of Thoracic Surgery and Urology, Luxi County People’s Hospital
  4. 4Yunnan Cancer Hospital
  5. 5Peking University Cancer Hospital Yunnan
Read full textPDFDOICite

Abstract

Background: Cancer imposes a heavy burden on society, and YouTube has become an important channel for the public to access health information; however, the quality of cancer-related videos on YouTube varies widely. Furthermore, there is currently a lack of systematic reviews on the quality of cancer-related videos on this platform.

Objectives: To systematically review the current state of research on the evaluation of the quality and reliability of cancer- and tumor-related videos on YouTube; to analyze trends in video quality, patterns of evaluation tool usage, the impact of uploader types on quality, and the relationship between quality and popularity.

Methods: A scoping review approach was adopted. We conducted a systematic search of PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, Scopus, CINAHL, CNKI, and the VIP database, covering the period from the inception of each database to June 1, 2026. We included original studies that evaluated the quality of cancer- and tumor-related videos on YouTube. Two researchers independently screened the literature and extracted data, with an additional independent reviewer assisting in the decision-making process.

Results: A total of 54 studies were included, collectively analyzing a cumulative total of 5,051 individual video observations across 21 cancer-related topics. The proportion of studies reporting high-quality video samples increased descriptively from 0% in 2018–2019 to 31.3% in 2023–2025. GQS (35 instances), original DISCERN (27 instances), modified DISCERN (21 instances), and JAMA (18 instances) were the most commonly used evaluation tools. Most studies comparing uploader types reported higher quality scores for videos from healthcare professionals or institutions.

Conclusion: The overall quality of cancer- and tumor-related videos on YouTube was generally low. The proportion of studies reporting moderate- or high-quality video samples was descriptively greater in more recent periods. Most studies comparing uploader types reported higher quality scores for videos from healthcare professionals or institutions. Greater professional involvement and platform-level strategies to identify and promote trustworthy health information may improve the educational value of these videos.

Related

  1. Evaluating the quality and reliability of YouTube videos about sepsis
    Dilek Ömür Arça, İsmail Erdemir, Feyza Ertürk Şafak +6
    MedicinePeer-reviewedCC BY-NCFull textGeneral medicineEurope PMC
  2. YouTube Videos on Arthrogenic Muscle Inhibition Show Low‐to‐Moderate Quality and Reliability
    Jacopo Conteduca, Damiano Longo, Fabrizio Piacquadio +4
    Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitationPeer-reviewedCC BY-NCFull textSurgery & anaesthesiaEurope PMCPMC
  3. Systematic analysis of the scientific quality, reliability, and educational value of Vaginal Natural Orifice Transluminal Endoscopic Surgery videos on YouTube.
    Okay Alptekin, Betül Kalkan
    Revista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992)Peer-reviewedCC BYFull textGeneral medicineEurope PMC
  4. Quality and Reliability of YouTube Videos on the Periodontal Tunnel Technique and Their Coverage of Procedure-Specific Content: A Cross-Sectional Study.
    Sahin Altug, Huseyin Akilli, Zeliha Basak Cakir Erdil +1
    CureusPeer-reviewedCC BYFull textGeneral medicineEurope PMC
  5. General information reliability, perceived educational quality, and transparency of YouTube videos on epileptiform discharges: an exploratory cross-sectional study.
    Elif Ünal, Elif Simin Issı
    BMC medical educationPeer-reviewedCC BY-NC-NDFull textGeneral medicineEurope PMCPMC

Cite

BibTeXRIS
BibTeX
@article{zhang2026quality,
  title = {{Quality and reliability of cancer- and tumor-related videos on YouTube: a scoping review}},
  author = {Jianjie Zhang and Lu Xu and Yu Fu and Yajuan Wang and Fangping Shi and Tao Shi},
  journal = {Frontiers in Public Health},
  year = {2026},
  month = oct,
  doi = {10.3389/fpubh.2026.1940232},
  url = {https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpubh.2026.1940232/full},
  note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY  - JOUR
TI  - Quality and reliability of cancer- and tumor-related videos on YouTube: a scoping review
AU  - Jianjie Zhang
AU  - Lu Xu
AU  - Yu Fu
AU  - Yajuan Wang
AU  - Fangping Shi
AU  - Tao Shi
PY  - 2026
DA  - 2026/10/14
JO  - Frontiers in Public Health
DO  - 10.3389/fpubh.2026.1940232
UR  - https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpubh.2026.1940232/full
AB  - Background: Cancer imposes a heavy burden on society, and YouTube has become an important channel for the public to access health information; however, the quality of cancer-related videos on YouTube varies widely. Furthermore, there is currently a lack of systematic reviews on the quality of cancer-related videos on this platform.  Objectives: To systematically review the current state of research on the evaluation of the quality and reliability of cancer- and tumor-related videos on YouTube; to analyze trends in video quality, patterns of evaluation tool usage, the impact of uploader types on quality, and the relationship between quality and popularity.  Methods: A scoping review approach was adopted. We conducted a systematic search of PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, Scopus, CINAHL, CNKI, and the VIP database, covering the period from the inception of each database to June 1, 2026. We included original studies that evaluated the quality of cancer- and tumor-related videos on YouTube. Two researchers independently screened the literature and extracted data, with an additional independent reviewer assisting in the decision-making process.  Results: A total of 54 studies were included, collectively analyzing a cumulative total of 5,051 individual video observations across 21 cancer-related topics. The proportion of studies reporting high-quality video samples increased descriptively from 0% in 2018–2019 to 31.3% in 2023–2025. GQS (35 instances), original DISCERN (27 instances), modified DISCERN (21 instances), and JAMA (18 instances) were the most commonly used evaluation tools. Most studies comparing uploader types reported higher quality scores for videos from healthcare professionals or institutions.  Conclusion: The overall quality of cancer- and tumor-related videos on YouTube was generally low. The proportion of studies reporting moderate- or high-quality video samples was descriptively greater in more recent periods. Most studies comparing uploader types reported higher quality scores for videos from healthcare professionals or institutions. Greater professional involvement and platform-level strategies to identify and promote trustworthy health information may improve the educational value of these videos.
SN  - 2296-2565
ER  -