SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Journal of Health Sciences and Medicine / 2026 / Volume: 9 Issue: 6

Information on cyclophosphamide side effects and toxicity on YouTube: evaluation of quality, reliability, and content

Tuğba Hamamcı(SIVAS CUMHURIYET UNIVERSITY)0000-0001-9763-3856
Mesut Parlak(SIVAS CUMHURIYET UNIVERSITY)0000-0001-9692-8396
Ahmet Ozan Kaleci(SIVAS CUMHURIYET UNIVERSITY)0000-0003-4514-6209
Şahin Yıldırım(SIVAS CUMHURIYET UNIVERSITY)0000-0001-6870-7932
Pages
—
Publication Date
2026-10-25
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Results: Overall video quality and reliability were low to moderate, with median scores of 3.50 for GQS, 3.00 for mDISCERN, and 2.00 for JAMA.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Aims: Cyclophosphamide is commonly used in the treatment of cancer and autoimmune diseases, although its use may be associated with serious adverse effects.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Methods: YouTube was searched using the terms “cyclophosphamide side effects,” “cyclophosphamide adverse effects,” and “cyclophosphamide toxicity.” YouTube Shorts were excluded, and all videos retrieved through the predefined search strategy were screened according to the eligibility criteria.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Results: Overall video quality and reliability were low to moderate, with median scores of 3.50 for GQS, 3.00 for mDISCERN, and 2.00 for JAMA.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Cyclophosphamide · side effects · adverse reactions

Abstract

Aims: Cyclophosphamide is commonly used in the treatment of cancer and autoimmune diseases, although its use may be associated with serious adverse effects. YouTube has become a prominent source for patients seeking online information about medications. This study aimed to examine the reliability, quality and content of YouTube videos providing information about cyclophosphamide-related side effects and toxicity. Methods: YouTube was searched using the terms “cyclophosphamide side effects,” “cyclophosphamide adverse effects,” and “cyclophosphamide toxicity.” YouTube Shorts were excluded, and all videos retrieved through the predefined search strategy were screened according to the eligibility criteria. Ninety-three English-language videos were included. Video characteristics and content were recorded, and quality and reliability were assessed using the Global Quality Scale (GQS), modified DISCERN (mDISCERN), and Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) criteria. Results: Overall video quality and reliability were low to moderate, with median scores of 3.50 for GQS, 3.00 for mDISCERN, and 2.00 for JAMA. Scientific citations were absent from 77.4% of the videos. Videos produced by medical doctors and professional associations had significantly higher quality scores than patient-generated videos. Although none of the patient-generated videos cited scientific sources, 92.9% discussed side-effect management and 85.7% mentioned pharmacological treatments. Patient-generated videos also received greater viewer engagement despite their lower quality and reliability. No significant association was found between popularity metrics and quality scores. Conclusion: These findings highlight the need for evidence-based, understandable, and engaging educational videos on cyclophosphamide toxicity and adverse-effect management.

🔖

Cite This Article

Hamamcı, T., Parlak, M., Kaleci, A. O., Yıldırım, Ş. (2026). Information on cyclophosphamide side effects and toxicity on YouTube: evaluation of quality, reliability, and content. Journal of Health Sciences and Medicine, Volume: 9 Issue: 6. https://ajindex.com/articles/1668072

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (23)

  1. Li L, Shan T, Zhang D, Ma F. Nowcasting and forecasting global aging and cancer burden: analysis of data from the GLOBOCAN and Global Burden of Disease Study. J Natl Cancer Cent. 2024;4(3):223-232. doi:10.1016/j.jncc.2024.05.002
  2. Bray F, Laversanne M, Sung H, et al. Global cancer statistics 2022: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2024;74(3):229-263. doi:10.3322/caac.21834
  3. de Carvalho JF, Skare TL. High-dose cyclophosphamide without stem cell rescue in autoimmune diseases: a systematic review. Eur J Rheumatol. 2024;11(2):53-63. doi:10.5152/eurjrheum.2024.23104
  4. Highley MS, Landuyt B, Prenen H, Harper PG, de Bruijn EA. The nitrogen mustards. Pharmacol Rev. 2022;74(3):552-599. doi:10.1124/pharmrev.120.000121
  5. Tsao M, Hoeg R, Pecoraro J, Kuehner M, Deen B, Guglielmo J. Predictors of fluid overload in allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant patients receiving post-transplant cyclophosphamide. J Oncol Pharm Pract. 2025;31(7):1046-1050. doi:10.1177/10781552241276418
  6. Helsby NA, Yong M, van Kan M, de Zoysa JR, Burns KE. The importance of both CYP2C19 and CYP2B6 germline variations in cyclophosphamide pharmacokinetics and clinical outcomes. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2019;85(9):1925-1934. doi:10.1111/bcp.14031
  7. Carlson LE, Zelinski EL, Toivonen KI, et al. Prevalence of psychosocial distress in cancer patients across 55 North American cancer centers. J Psychosoc Oncol. 2019;37(1):5-21. doi:10.1080/07347332.2018.1521490
  8. Smith LE, Webster RK, Rubin GJ. A systematic review of factors associated with side-effect expectations from medical interventions. Health Expect. 2020;23(4):731-758. doi:10.1111/hex.13059
  9. Mohamed F, Shoufan A. Users’ experience with health-related content on YouTube: an exploratory study. BMC Public Health. 2024;24(1):86. doi:10.1186/s12889-023-17585-5
  10. Ko BC, Haw S. Evaluation of YouTube videos about isotretinoin as treatment of acne vulgaris. Ann Dermatol. 2022;34(5):340-348. doi:10.5021/ad.21.143
  11. Ünlü Açıkel S, Özdemir AK, Emre S. The reliability and quality of YouTube videos about isotretinoin treatment and suicide. Clin Exp Dermatol. 2024;49(11):1356-1361. doi:10.1093/ced/llae166
  12. Bernard A, Langille M, Hughes S, Rose C, Leddin D, Veldhuyzen van Zanten S. A systematic review of patient inflammatory bowel disease information resources on the World Wide Web. Am J Gastroenterol. 2007;102(9):2070-2077. doi:10.1111/j.1572-0241.2007.01325.x
  13. Silberg WM, Lundberg GD, Musacchio RA. Assessing, controlling, and assuring the quality of medical information on the Internet: caveant lector et viewor-let the reader and viewer beware. JAMA. 1997;277(15):1244-1245. doi:10.1001/jama.1997.03540390074039
  14. Charnock D, Shepperd S, Needham G, Gann R. DISCERN: an instrument for judging the quality of written consumer health information on treatment choices. J Epidemiol Community Health. 1999;53(2):105-111. doi:10.1136/jech.53.2.105
  15. Mohammad-Rahimi H, Ourang SA, Pourhoseingholi MA, Dianat O, Dummer PMH, Nosrat A. Validity and reliability of artificial intelligence chatbots as public sources of information on endodontics. Int Endod J. 2024;57(3):305-314. doi:10.1111/iej.14014
  16. Sahin E, Seyyar M. Assessing the scientific quality and reliability of YouTube videos about chemotherapy. Medicine (Baltimore). 2023;102(45):e35916. doi:10.1097/MD.0000000000035916
  17. Osman W, Mohamed F, Elhassan M, Shoufan A. Is YouTube a reliable source of health-related information? A systematic review. BMC Med Educ. 2022;22(1):382. doi:10.1186/s12909-022-03446-z
  18. Altunisik E, Firat YE, Kiyak Keceli Y. Content and quality analysis of videos about multiple sclerosis on social media: the case of YouTube. Mult Scler Relat Disord. 2022;65:104024. doi:10.1016/j.msard.2022.104024
  19. Alpua M, Hamamcı M. Reliability of online health information: evaluation of Guillain-Barré syndrome videos on YouTube. J Clin Neurosci. 2026;144:111825. doi:10.1016/j.jocn.2025.111825
  20. Li HO, Bailey A, Huynh D, Chan J. YouTube as a source of information on COVID-19: a pandemic of misinformation? BMJ Glob Health. 2020;5(5):e002604. doi:10.1136/bmjgh-2020-002604
  21. Akalin B, Demirbaş MB. Evaluation of the quality and reliability of YouTube videos as a source of information on portable HBOT in home health care services quality and reliability analysis of YouTube videos on portable HBOT. J Eval Clin Pract. 2026;32(2):e70386. doi:10.1111/jep.70386
  22. Loeb S, Sengupta S, Butaney M, et al. Dissemination of misinformative and biased information about prostate cancer on YouTube. Eur Urol. 2019;75(4):564-567. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2018.10.056
  23. Ferhatoglu MF, Kartal A, Ekici U, Gurkan A. Evaluation of the reliability, utility, and quality of the information in sleeve gastrectomy videos shared on open access video sharing platform YouTube. Obes Surg. 2019;29(5):1477-1484. doi:10.1007/s11695-019-03738-2