Full bibliography

ObjectiveTo evaluate the educational quality, reliability, and transparency of YouTube™ videos on lipoedema, and to examine associations with uploader type and engagement metrics.MethodsOn 15 May 2025 we searched YouTube™ for "lipoedema," screened the first 200 relevance-ranked items, and included videos ≥60 s with intelligible audio. Advertisements, duplicates and soundless videos were excluded. Two independent physicians in Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation (PM&R) rated eligible videos using DISCERN, the Global Quality Score (GQS), and the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmark criteria; disagreements were discussed and original ratings retained for agreement analyses. We recorded upload date, duration, views, likes, comments, channel subscribers, uploader category, and content domain.ResultsWe analyzed 92 YouTube™ lipoedema videos uploaded between 25 February 2015 and 8 January 2025. Uploader mix: vascular surgeons 39.1% (largest) and PM&R physicians 4.3% (smallest); the most common topic was definition + symptoms + management (26.1%). Mean DISCERN totals were 33.47 ± 9.88 and 33.42 ± 8.68 (both poor); mean GQS 2.18 ± 0.82 and 2.43 ± 0.81; only 6.6% were high quality and none scored 5/5. Views correlated strongly with likes and comments (both p < .001), moderately with duration (p < .01), and weakly with subscribers (p < .05). Inter-rater agreement was strong (r = 0.859/0.663/1.000; all p < .001).ConclusionThe overall quality and transparency of YouTube™ lipoedema videos are suboptimal despite substantial engagement. Increasing expert-authored, evidence-based content-particularly from PM&R- and co-produced patient-clinician videos may better align reliability with reach.