A Comprehensive Evaluation of Primary Breast Augmentation Education Videos for Surgical Trainees
Lauren Powell, John Miskella, Lily Qian, George Landis, Minh-Doan Nguyen, Jennifer Harrington

TL;DR
This study compares the quality of breast augmentation educational videos on YouTube and a peer-reviewed journal, finding that journal videos are significantly higher quality.
Contribution
The study introduces a 14-point rubric to evaluate breast augmentation videos and demonstrates that peer-reviewed journal videos outperform YouTube videos in educational quality.
Findings
Only 45% of YouTube videos were rated as high quality, compared to all PRS videos.
PRS videos scored significantly higher (11.1/14) than YouTube videos (9.0/14).
Common metrics like views and likes on YouTube do not predict video quality.
Abstract
Aesthetic breast augmentation surgeries were the second most common surgical aesthetic procedure in the US in 2023.1 In a survey of residents and 4th-year medical students, 95% reported using online videos as a tool to learn about surgical procedures, the majority citing YouTube as the most common source.2 While videos can be a crucial learning tool for trainees, it is important that these resources undergo a thorough evaluation to establish their educational value. While prior studies in the otolaryngology and general surgery literature have investigated the quality of surgical YouTube videos,3,4 no studies have examined the quality of videos related to breast augmentation. Thus, the objective of this study is to compare the quality of breast augmentation educational videos. A total of 640 intraoperative primary breast augmentation YouTube videos and 3,527 videos published in the…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsDigital Imaging in Medicine · Breast Implant and Reconstruction · Facial Rejuvenation and Surgery Techniques
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 12023 ASPS Procedural Statistics Release. American Society of Plastic Surgeons. 2023. Accessed September 12, 2024. https://www.plasticsurgery.org/documents/news/statistics/2023/plastic-surgery-statistics-report-2023.pdf
- 2Rapp AK , Healy MG, Charlton ME, Keith JN, Rosenbaum ME, Kapadia MR. You Tube is the Most Frequently Used Educational Video Source for Surgical Preparation. J Surg Educ. 2016;73(6):1072–1076. doi: 10.1016/j.jsurg.2016.04.02427316383 PMC 7263439 · doi ↗ · pubmed ↗
- 3Derakhshan A , Lee L, Bhama P, Barbarite E, Shaye D. Assessing the Educational Quality of ‘You Tube’ Videos for Facelifts. Am J Otolaryngol. 2019;40(2):156–159. doi: 10.1016/j.amjoto.2019.01.00130661892 · doi ↗ · pubmed ↗
- 4Gupta T , Haidery TH, Sharma R, Sharma S, Kumar A. How Reliable Are You Tube Videos for General Surgery Residents Learning?Cureus. 2023 Feb;15(2):e 34718. doi: 10.7759/cureus.3471836909043 PMC 9996672 · doi ↗ · pubmed ↗
