Educational quality and reliability of neurosurgical content on YouTube: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract

Introduction: YouTube is increasingly used for neurosurgical learning; however, the educational quality, transparency, and reliability of neurosurgery-related content—and whether these features differ by video source—remain unclear. Objective: To synthesize published evaluations of neurosurgical YouTube videos and meta-analyze standardized quality/reliability scores, exploring source- and time-related differences and reporting gaps in validation and procedural completeness. Methods: Following PRISMA, we searched PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and Web of Science (2017–2024) for studies assessing neurosurgical YouTube videos using standardized tools (DISCERN/mDISCERN, JAMA Benchmark, Global Quality Score [GQS]). Data were pooled using random-effects meta-analysis with Hartung–Knapp adjustment; scores were also transformed to the Proportion of Maximum Possible (POMP, 0–100). Results: Sixteen studies (12–1,233 videos each) were included. On native scales, pooled means were: DISCERN per-item 3.06/5, DISCERN total 30.1/80, JAMA 2.41/4, and GQS 3.04/5. Harmonized POMP point estimates (0–100) were: DISCERN 39.8, JAMA 60.3, and GQS 51.0. Heterogeneity was substantial (I2> 95%) except for DISCERN total (I2= 0%). Subgroup analyses suggested higher scores for institutional versus non-institutional sources, although meta-regression did not confirm significance. Validation and procedural completeness were infrequently reported. Conclusion: Neurosurgical YouTube content shows moderate-to-low educational quality with substantial inconsistency. Institutional sources may perform better, but gaps in transparency, validation, structure, and procedural completeness are common. Standardized production criteria and curated peer-reviewed repositories may improve safe integration into neurosurgical education.