Educational Quality of YouTube Videos on Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection: A LAP-VEGaS-Based Analysis
Research Article
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17916027Keywords:
Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection, YouTube, Educational Quality, LAP-VEGaS Scoring System, Video Power Index, Surgical EducationAbstract
Introduction: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is a technically demanding procedure that requires advanced training, yet the educational quality and reliability of related YouTube content remain uncertain.
Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the educational quality of YouTube videos related to ESD using the LAP-VEGaS scoring system and to examine their association with viewer engagement metrics.
Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted in November 2025 by searching YouTube with the keyword “endoscopic submucosal dissection,” yielding 26 eligible videos after applying predefined criteria. For each video, basic characteristics (upload date, duration, views, likes, dislikes, comments) and viewer interaction metrics (like rate, view rate, Video Power Index) were recorded. Two independent reviewers assessed educational quality using the nine-item LAP-VEGaS scoring system, classifying videos as high quality (HQ, ≥9 points) or low quality (LQ, <9 points). Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS 26.0, with p < 0.05 considered significant.
Results: Of the 26 analyzed videos, 13 (50%) were classified as HQ. HQ videos had significantly higher LAP-VEGaS scores than LQ videos (13.61 ± 1.98 vs. 4.15 ± 1.77, p < 0.001). HQ videos tended to be longer than LQ videos (1,262 ± 748 s vs. 1,028 ± 1,239 s, p = 0.064). The view ratio was significantly higher in LQ videos (p = 0.043). No significant differences were found between groups regarding total views, like ratio, or VPI.
Conclusion: The educational quality of ESD-related YouTube videos is inconsistent and often inadequate, underscoring the need for peer-reviewed, structured content to provide more reliable educational resources.
References
Tsuji S, Doyama H, Kobayashi N, et al. Outcomes of noncurative endoscopic submucosal dissection for T1 colorectal cancer: Prospective, multicenter, cohort study in Japan. Dig Endosc. 2024;36(12):1369-1379. doi: 10.1111/den.14878.
Fujiyoshi Y, Khalaf K, He T, et al. Comparison of EMR versus endoscopic submucosal dissection for Barrett's neoplasia and esophageal adenocarcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc. 2024;100(5):817-828.e5. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2024.06.012.
Arayakarnkul S, Aihara H, Repici A et al. Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Previously Attempted Colorectal Lesions: An International Multicenter Experience. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2025;23(11):1925-1934.e2. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2025.02.021
Gul MC, Analysis of Turkish Content Endoscopic Ultrasonography Videos on Youtube: What is the Level of Information? By Whom are They Uploaded?. Europeanatolia. 2023; 1(2):50-55. doi:10.5281/zenodo.10268276
Perry NM, Kelly JJ, Levy BA. Editorial Commentary: Surgical Videos on YouTube Are Not Peer Reviewed and Have Low Educational Value. Arthroscopy. 2024;40(8):2244-2245. doi: 10.1016/j.arthro.2024.03.006.
Celentano V, Smart N, Cahill RA et al. Development and validation of a recommended checklist for assessment of surgical videos quality: the LAParoscopic surgery Video Educational GuidelineS (LAP-VEGaS) video assessment tool. Surg Endosc. 2021;35(3):1362-1369. doi: 10.1007/s00464-020-075174.
Bal A, Çolakoğlu MK, Öter V et al. Are YouTube Videos Sufficient for Educational Purposes for Robotic Right Hemicolectomy Learning and Has Complete Mesocolic Excision Changed That? Turk J Gastroenterol. 2023;34(12):1220-1226. doi: 10.5152/tjg.2023.22827.
Kim JH, Danilkowicz RM, Meeker ZD et al. Evaluating the reliability and quality of YouTube videos regarding medial collateral ligament knee injury as a patient education resource. J ISAKOS. 2024;9(6):100288. doi: 10.1016/j.jisako.2024.06.007.
de'Angelis N, Gavriilidis P, Martínez-Pérez A et al. Educational value of surgical videos on YouTube: quality assessment of laparoscopic appendectomy videos by senior surgeons vs. novice trainees. World J Emerg Surg. 2019;14:22. doi:10.1186/s13017-019-0241-6
Halloran S, Dingillo G, Badrinathan A et al. YouTube videos contain poor and biased thoracic surgery educational content. Surg Pract Sci. 2022;(28)11:100-133. doi: 10.1016/j.sipas.2022.100133.
Anadolulu Aİ, Gerçel G, Durakbaşa ÇU. Quality Assessment of YouTube Videos as an Information Source for Bowel Management in Children. J Pediatr Surg. 2023;58(12):2343-2346. doi: 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2023.08.014.
Celentano V, Smart N, Cahill RA et al. Development and validation of a recommended checklist for assessment of surgical videos quality: the LAParoscopic surgery Video Educational GuidelineS (LAP-VEGaS) video assessment tool. Surg Endosc. 2021;35(3):1362-1369. doi: 10.1007/s00464-020-07517-4.
Rouhi AD, Roberson JL, Kindall E et al. What are trainees watching? Assessing the educational quality of online laparoscopic cholecystectomy training videos using the LAP-VEGaS guidelines. Surgery. 2023;174(3):524-528. doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2023.05.021.
Kim SH, Kim BG, Choi HS et al. Endoscopic submucosal dissection using a detachable assistant robot: a comparative in vivo feasibility study (with video). Surg Endosc. 2021;35(10):5836-5841. doi: 10.1007/s00464-021-08510-1.
Tani M, Manuguerra M, Khan S. Can videos affect learning outcomes? Evidence from an actual learning environment. Educ Technol Res Dev. 2022;70(5):1675-1693. doi: 10.1007/s11423-022-10147-3.
Hewitt JN, Kovoor JG, Ovenden CD et al. Quality of YouTube Videos on Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy for Patient Education. Minim Invasive Surg. 2021;(15)2021:2462832. doi: 10.1155/2021/2462832.
Gul MC, Gul O, Akkus F. Are the anal sphincter repair videos on YouTube™ informative? Two surgical department view. Kastamonu Med J. 2025;5(1):4-8. doi: 10.51271/KMJ-0174
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Acta Medica Ruha
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
