Evaluation of the Quality and Reliability of... (2026 study) Skip to main content
Clinical Study Journal of evaluation in clinical practice 2026

Evaluation of the Quality and Reliability of YouTube Videos as a Source of Information on Portable HBOT in Home Health Care Services Quality and Reliability Analysis of YouTube Videos on Portable HBOT.

Akalin B, Demirbaş MB, Journal of evaluation in clinical practice, 2026

Tier 2, Indexed

Automatically imported from PubMed based on relevance criteria.

Summary

What Researchers Did

Researchers checked 45 YouTube videos about portable hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT) chambers to see how good and how trustworthy the information in them was.

What They Found

This cross-sectional study of 45 portable HBOT videos found that most videos did not meet high quality standards, with only 31% rated high quality, 40% rated medium quality, and 29% rated low quality. The mean modified DISCERN score was 3.1 and the mean Video Information and Quality Index (VIQI) score was 3.3, and 58% of videos were rated low reliability. The researchers used four separate scales, the Global Quality Scale, modified DISCERN, VIQI, and the JAMA benchmark criteria, to rate quality, reliability, accuracy, and transparency.

What This Means for Canadian Patients

The abstract notes that portable oxygen chambers are especially risky and require a high level of technical knowledge, since accidents involving oxygen and pressure are possible during HBOT treatment. Patients researching portable HBOT options on YouTube should be cautious, since this study found that most videos on the topic were not high quality and more than half were rated low reliability. Anyone considering a portable HBOT device should look beyond YouTube videos for accurate safety and technical information.

Canadian Relevance

No direct Canadian connection identified.

Study Limitations

The study only reviewed content on one platform, YouTube, and quality ratings were based on assessments by two researchers using scoring scales, which can involve some subjectivity.

This plain-language summary was generated with AI assistance from the study's abstract; it has not been individually reviewed by a clinician. Always consult the source study and a qualified healthcare professional. See our editorial policy.

Was this summary helpful?

Study Details

Study Type Clinical Study
Category Wound Care
Source Pubmed
PubMed ID 41855394
Year Published 2026
Journal Journal of evaluation in clinical practice
MeSH Terms Humans; Social Media; Reproducibility of Results; Video Recording; Cross-Sectional Studies; Hyperbaric Oxygenation; Home Care Services; Information Dissemination; Information Sources

Cite This Study

Share

This study relates to Problem Wounds. Read the full clinical overview, the evidence base, and Canadian treatment access for this condition.

Find a Canadian Clinic Treating Wound Care

Browse verified hyperbaric facilities across Canada.

View Canadian Facilities

Disclaimer: This study summary is provided for informational and educational purposes only. It does not constitute medical advice. The information presented reflects the findings of the original research authors and may not represent the views of Canada Hyperbarics. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional before making treatment decisions.

Last updated: April 1, 2026 | Reviewed by: Canada Hyperbarics Editorial Team | Editorial process | Research sources | Counts & methodology