Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

Quality and reliability of headache-related information on YouTube: a cross-sectional analysis using DISCERN, JAMA, and GQS

Year 2026, Volume: 9 Issue: 1, 78 - 82, 05.01.2026
https://doi.org/10.32322/jhsm.1806392
https://izlik.org/JA87TE73GR

Abstract

Aims: The aim of this study is to evaluate the information quality and characteristics of videos related to “headache” on YouTube.
Methods: A search was conducted on YouTube using the keyword “headache,” and the first 100 videos were listed. Repetitive, promotional, and videos shorter than 2 minutes were excluded; 72 videos were included in the analysis. The videos were evaluated by two researchers using DISCERN, JAMA, and the Global Quality Scale (GQS). The number of views, likes, duration, and uploader type were recorded. SPSS 23.0 was used for statistical analysis.
Results: The average video duration was 8.4±3.2 minutes, and the average number of views was 45,200±18,600. Thirty-eight percent of the videos were uploaded by physicians/institutions, and 62% were uploaded by individual users. The mean GQS score was 2.3±0.9 (moderate quality), DISCERN 31.2±7.5, and JAMA 2.1±0.8. Professional content had significantly higher quality scores (p<0.01). There was no significant relationship between the number of views and quality (p=0.37).
Conclusion: Most headache videos on YouTube are of low-to-moderate quality. Physicians should consider that information obtained by patients from online sources may not be reliable; healthcare professionals should produce higher-quality content.

References

  • Taştemur M, Mordağ Çiçek C. Quality analysis of YouTube videos in the management of hyperlipidemia in adults. J Health Sci Med. 2023;6(5): 1074–1079. doi:10.32322/jhsm.1344870
  • Madathil KC, Rivera-Rodriguez AJ, Greenstein JS, Gramopadhye AK. Healthcare information on YouTube: a systematic review. Health Informatics J. 2015;21(3):173–194. doi:10.1177/1460458213512220
  • Çelik H, Polat O, Ozcan C, Camur S, Kilinc BE, Uzun M. Assessment of the quality and reliability of the information on rotator cuff repair on YouTube. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2020;106(1):31-34. doi:10.1016/j.otsr.2019.10.004
  • Kuru T, Erken HY. Evaluation of the quality and reliability of YouTube videos on rotator cuff tears. Cureus. 2020;12(2):e6852. doi:10.7759/cureus.6852
  • Delli K, Livas C, Vissink A, Spijkervet FKL. Is YouTube useful as a source of information for Sjögren’s syndrome? Oral Dis. 2016;22(3):196-201. doi:10.1111/odi.12404
  • Gupta R, Kumar V, Sahu M, et al. Migraine information on the web for patients: a YouTube content analysis based on a scoring system. Cureus. 2023;15(12):e50864. doi:10.7759/cureus.51054
  • Saffi MAL, Chaves MLF, Cezar L, et al. A review of YouTube as a source of information on migraine. Cephalalgia. 2020;40(13):1511-1517. doi:10. 1177/0333102420943891
  • Chaudhry SR, Wold JJ, Jensen RM, et al. Cluster headache-the worst possible pain on YouTube. Headache. 2022;62(3):331-338. doi.org/10. 1111/head.14368
  • Leong AY, Sanghera R, Jhajj J, Desai N, Jammu BS, Makowsky MJ. Is YouTube useful as a source of health information for adults with type 2 diabetes? A South Asian perspective. Can J Diabetes. 2018;42(4):395-403.e4. doi:10.1016/j.jcjd.2017.10.056
  • Singh AG, Singh S, Singh PP. YouTube for information on rheumatoid arthritis-a wakeup call? J Rheumatol. 2012;39(5):899–903. doi:10.3899/jrheum.111114
  • 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):105-111. doi:10.1136/jech.53.2.105
  • Silberg WM, Lundberg GD, Musacchio RA. Assessing, controlling, and assuring the quality of medical information on the internet: JAMA benchmarks. JAMA. 1997;277(15):1244-1245. doi:10.1001/jama.1997.035 40390074039
  • Desai T, Shariff A, Dhingra V, Minhas D, Eure M, Kats M. Is content really king? an objective analysis of the public's response to medical videos on YouTube. PLoS One. 2013;8(12):e82469. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0082469
  • Ferhatoglu MF, Kartal A, Ekici U, Gurkan A. Evaluation of the reliability, utility, and quality of the information in sleeve gastrectomy videos shared on open access video sharing platform YouTube. Obes Surg. 2019;29(5):1477-1484. doi:10.1007/s11695-019-03738-2
  • Baig MM, Irfan A, Arshad R, et al. Assessment of the quality, content, and reliability of YouTube videos on diabetes mellitus and polycystic ovary syndrome: a systematic review with cross-sectional analysis comparing peer-reviewed videos. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2024;164(3):657–664. doi: 10.1530/EC-24-0059
  • Akkaya N, Akkaya S. Educational quality and reliability of YouTube content related to musculoskeletal ultrasound. Arch Rheumatol. 2025;40 (1):23-30. doi:10.5152/ArchRheumatol.2025.25038
  • Khalil C, Pauli R, Malek R, et al. Large language models for the evaluation of health-related YouTube content: potential and limitations. Digit Health. 2024;10:2055207624123456.

YouTube’daki baş ağrısı ile İlgili bilgilerin kalitesi ve güvenilirliği: DISCERN, JAMA ve GQS kullanılarak yapılan kesitsel bir analiz

Year 2026, Volume: 9 Issue: 1, 78 - 82, 05.01.2026
https://doi.org/10.32322/jhsm.1806392
https://izlik.org/JA87TE73GR

Abstract

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı, YouTube’daki “baş ağrısı” ile ilgili videoların bilgi kalitesi ve niteliklerini değerlendirmektir.
Gereç ve Yöntem: YouTube’da “baş ağrısı” anahtar kelimesi ile arama yapıldı ve ilk 100 video listelendi. Tekrarlayan, reklam amaçlı, 2 dakikadan kısa videolar dışlandı; 72 video analize dahil edildi. Videolar DISCERN, JAMA ve Global Quality Scale (GQS; Küresel Kalite Ölçeği) kullanılarak iki araştırmacı tarafından değerlendirildi. İzlenme sayısı, beğeni, süre, yükleyici tipi kaydedildi. İstatistiksel analiz için SPSS 23.0 kullanıldı.
Bulgular: Ortalama video süresi 8,4±3,2 dakika, izlenme sayısı 45.200±18.600 idi. Videoların %38’i hekim/kurum, %62’si bireysel kullanıcılarca yüklenmişti. Ortalama GQS skoru 2,3±0,9 (orta kalite), DISCERN 31,2±7,5, JAMA 2,1±0,8 bulundu. Profesyonel içerikler anlamlı derecede daha yüksek kalite puanına sahipti (p<0,01). İzlenme sayısı ile kalite arasında anlamlı ilişki yoktu (p=0,37).
Sonuç: YouTube’daki baş ağrısı videolarının çoğu düşük-orta kaliteye sahiptir. Hekimler, hastaların çevrimiçi kaynaklardan edindikleri bilgilerin güvenilir olmadığını göz önünde bulundurmalı; sağlık profesyonelleri ise daha kaliteli içerikler üretmelidir.

References

  • Taştemur M, Mordağ Çiçek C. Quality analysis of YouTube videos in the management of hyperlipidemia in adults. J Health Sci Med. 2023;6(5): 1074–1079. doi:10.32322/jhsm.1344870
  • Madathil KC, Rivera-Rodriguez AJ, Greenstein JS, Gramopadhye AK. Healthcare information on YouTube: a systematic review. Health Informatics J. 2015;21(3):173–194. doi:10.1177/1460458213512220
  • Çelik H, Polat O, Ozcan C, Camur S, Kilinc BE, Uzun M. Assessment of the quality and reliability of the information on rotator cuff repair on YouTube. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2020;106(1):31-34. doi:10.1016/j.otsr.2019.10.004
  • Kuru T, Erken HY. Evaluation of the quality and reliability of YouTube videos on rotator cuff tears. Cureus. 2020;12(2):e6852. doi:10.7759/cureus.6852
  • Delli K, Livas C, Vissink A, Spijkervet FKL. Is YouTube useful as a source of information for Sjögren’s syndrome? Oral Dis. 2016;22(3):196-201. doi:10.1111/odi.12404
  • Gupta R, Kumar V, Sahu M, et al. Migraine information on the web for patients: a YouTube content analysis based on a scoring system. Cureus. 2023;15(12):e50864. doi:10.7759/cureus.51054
  • Saffi MAL, Chaves MLF, Cezar L, et al. A review of YouTube as a source of information on migraine. Cephalalgia. 2020;40(13):1511-1517. doi:10. 1177/0333102420943891
  • Chaudhry SR, Wold JJ, Jensen RM, et al. Cluster headache-the worst possible pain on YouTube. Headache. 2022;62(3):331-338. doi.org/10. 1111/head.14368
  • Leong AY, Sanghera R, Jhajj J, Desai N, Jammu BS, Makowsky MJ. Is YouTube useful as a source of health information for adults with type 2 diabetes? A South Asian perspective. Can J Diabetes. 2018;42(4):395-403.e4. doi:10.1016/j.jcjd.2017.10.056
  • Singh AG, Singh S, Singh PP. YouTube for information on rheumatoid arthritis-a wakeup call? J Rheumatol. 2012;39(5):899–903. doi:10.3899/jrheum.111114
  • 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):105-111. doi:10.1136/jech.53.2.105
  • Silberg WM, Lundberg GD, Musacchio RA. Assessing, controlling, and assuring the quality of medical information on the internet: JAMA benchmarks. JAMA. 1997;277(15):1244-1245. doi:10.1001/jama.1997.035 40390074039
  • Desai T, Shariff A, Dhingra V, Minhas D, Eure M, Kats M. Is content really king? an objective analysis of the public's response to medical videos on YouTube. PLoS One. 2013;8(12):e82469. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0082469
  • Ferhatoglu MF, Kartal A, Ekici U, Gurkan A. Evaluation of the reliability, utility, and quality of the information in sleeve gastrectomy videos shared on open access video sharing platform YouTube. Obes Surg. 2019;29(5):1477-1484. doi:10.1007/s11695-019-03738-2
  • Baig MM, Irfan A, Arshad R, et al. Assessment of the quality, content, and reliability of YouTube videos on diabetes mellitus and polycystic ovary syndrome: a systematic review with cross-sectional analysis comparing peer-reviewed videos. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2024;164(3):657–664. doi: 10.1530/EC-24-0059
  • Akkaya N, Akkaya S. Educational quality and reliability of YouTube content related to musculoskeletal ultrasound. Arch Rheumatol. 2025;40 (1):23-30. doi:10.5152/ArchRheumatol.2025.25038
  • Khalil C, Pauli R, Malek R, et al. Large language models for the evaluation of health-related YouTube content: potential and limitations. Digit Health. 2024;10:2055207624123456.
There are 17 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language English
Subjects Family Medicine
Journal Section Research Article
Authors

Safiye Kübra Çetindağ Karatlı 0000-0001-7439-9622

Submission Date October 18, 2025
Acceptance Date November 26, 2025
Publication Date January 5, 2026
DOI https://doi.org/10.32322/jhsm.1806392
IZ https://izlik.org/JA87TE73GR
Published in Issue Year 2026 Volume: 9 Issue: 1

Cite

AMA 1.Çetindağ Karatlı SK. Quality and reliability of headache-related information on YouTube: a cross-sectional analysis using DISCERN, JAMA, and GQS. J Health Sci Med / JHSM. 2026;9(1):78-82. doi:10.32322/jhsm.1806392

Interuniversity Board (UAK) Equivalency: Article published in Ulakbim TR Index journal [10 POINTS], and Article published in other (excuding 1a, b, c) international indexed journal (1d) [5 POINTS].

The Directories (indexes) and Platforms we are included in are at the bottom of the page.

Note: Our journal is not WOS indexed and therefore is not classified as Q.

You can download Council of Higher Education (CoHG) [Yüksek Öğretim Kurumu (YÖK)] Criteria) decisions about predatory/questionable journals and the author's clarification text and journal charge policy from your browser. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/journal/2316/file/4905/show







The indexes of the journal are ULAKBİM TR Dizin, ICI World of Journals, DOAJ, Directory of Research Journals Indexing (DRJI), General Impact Factor, ASOS Index, WorldCat (OCLC), MIAR, OpenAIRE, Türkiye Citation Index, Türk Medline Index, InfoBase Index, Scilit, etc.

       images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRB9r6zRLDl0Pz7om2DQkiTQXqDtuq64Eb1Qg&usqp=CAU

500px-WorldCat_logo.svg.png

atifdizini.png

logo_world_of_journals_no_margin.png

images?q=tbn%3AANd9GcTNpvUjQ4Ffc6uQBqMQrqYMR53c7bRqD9rohCINkko0Y1a_hPSn&usqp=CAU

doaj.png  

images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSpOQFsFv3RdX0lIQJC3SwkFIA-CceHin_ujli_JrqBy3A32A_Tx_oMoIZn96EcrpLwTQg&usqp=CAU

ici2.png

asos-index.png

drji.png





The platforms of the journal are Google Scholar, CrossRef (DOI), ResearchBib, Open Access, COPE, ICMJE, NCBI, ORCID, Creative Commons, etc.

COPE-logo-300x199.jpgimages?q=tbn:ANd9GcQR6_qdgvxMP9owgnYzJ1M6CS_XzR_d7orTjA&usqp=CAU

icmje_1_orig.png

cc.logo.large.png

ncbi.pngimages?q=tbn:ANd9GcRBcJw8ia8S9TI4Fun5vj3HPzEcEKIvF_jtnw&usqp=CAU

ORCID_logo.png

1*mvsP194Golg0Dmo2rjJ-oQ.jpeg


Our Journal using the DergiPark system indexed are;

Ulakbim TR Dizin,  Index Copernicus, ICI World of JournalsDirectory of Research Journals Indexing (DRJI), General Impact FactorASOS Index, OpenAIRE, MIAR,  EuroPub, WorldCat (OCLC)DOAJ,  Türkiye Citation Index, Türk Medline Index, InfoBase Index


Our Journal using the DergiPark system platforms are;

Google, Google Scholar, CrossRef (DOI), ResearchBib, ICJME, COPE, NCBI, ORCID, Creative Commons, Open Access, and etc.


Journal articles are evaluated as "Double-Blind Peer Review". 

Our journal has adopted the Open Access Policy and articles in JHSM are Open Access and fully comply with Open Access instructions. All articles in the system can be accessed and read without a journal user.  https//dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/jhsm/page/9535

Journal charge policy   https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/jhsm/page/10912

Our journal has been indexed in DOAJ as of May 18, 2020.

Our journal has been indexed in TR-Dizin as of March 12, 2021.


17873

Articles published in Journal of Health Sciences and Medicine have open access and are licensed under the Creative Commons CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 International License.