1.
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
2.
Erdem H, Sisik A. The reliability of bariatric surgery videos in YouTube platform. Obes Surg. 2018;28(3):712-716. doi:10.1007/s11695-017-2911-3
3.
Coughlin MJ, Shurnas PS. Hallux rigidus: demographics, etiology, and radiographic assessment. Foot Ankle Int. 2003;24(10):731-743. doi:10. 1177/107110070302401002
4.
Yee G, Lau J. Current concepts review: hallux rigidus. Foot Ankle Int. 2008;29(6):637-646. doi:10.3113/FAI.2008.0637
5.
Ho B, Baumhauer J. Hallux rigidus. EFORT Open Rev. 2017;2(1):13-20. doi:10.1302/2058-5241.2.160031
6.
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
7.
Özdemir V, Hekim N. Birth of industry 5.0: making sense of big data with artificial intelligence, “the internet of things” and next-generation technology policy. OMICS. 2018;22(1):65-76. doi:10.1089/omi.2017.0194
8.
Orkin AM, Gill PJ, Ghersi D, et al. Guidelines for reporting trial protocols and completed trials modified due to the COVID-19 pandemic and other extenuating circumstances: the CONSERVE 2021 statement. JAMA. 2021;326(3):257-265. doi:10.1001/jama.2021.9941
9.
Uzun M, Cingoz T, Duran ME, Varol A, Celik H. The videos on YouTube® related to hallux valgus surgery have insufficient information. Foot Ankle Surg. 2022;28(4):414-417. doi:10.1016/j.fas.2021.05.009
10.
Tekin SB, Bozgeyik B. Quality and content analysis of hallux valgus videos on YouTube®. J Foot Ankle Surg. 2023;62(1):85-90. doi:10.1053/j.jfas.2022.05.003
11.
Cengiz T, Şimşek ŞA, Ersoy A, Coşkun HS, Pişkin A. Assessment of YouTube videos on frozen shoulder: a quality analysis using DISCERN and JAMA scoring systems. Acta Med Alanya. 2024;8(1):15-19. doi:10. 30565/medalanya.1417889
12.
Bruce-Brand RA, Baker JF, Byrne DP, Hogan NA, McCarthy T. Assessment of the quality and content of information on anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction on the internet. Arthroscopy. 2013; 29(6):1095-1100. doi:10.1016/j.arthro.2013.02.007
13.
Kunze KN, Cohn MR, Wakefield C, et al. YouTube as a source of information about the posterior cruciate ligament: a content-quality and reliability analysis. Arthrosc Sports Med Rehabil. 2019;1(2):e109-e114. doi:10.1016/j.asmr.2019.09.003
14.
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
15.
Wong M, Desai B, Bautista M, Kwon O, Kolodychuk N, Chimento G. YouTube is a poor source of patient information for knee arthroplasty and knee osteoarthritis. Arthroplast Today. 2018;5(1):78-82. doi:10.1016/ j.artd.2018.09.010
16.
Gokcen HB, Gumussuyu G. A quality analysis of disc herniation videos on YouTube. World Neurosurg. 2019;124:e799-e804. doi:10.1016/j.wneu. 2019.01.146
17.
MacLeod MG, Hoppe DJ, Simunovic N, Bhandari M, Philippon MJ, Ayeni OR. YouTube as an information source for femoroacetabular impingement: a systematic review of video content. Arthroscopy. 2015; 31(1):136-142. doi:10.1016/j.arthro.2014.06.009