Research study · JMIR Formative Research · 2025
Misinformation About Medical Cannabis in YouTube Videos: Systematic Review
Verified on PubMed Oxford CEBM Level 1A: Systematic Review & Meta-Analysis
A 2025 systematic review in JMIR Formative Research tested medical cannabis in communication. The results were mixed, with a clear pattern of poor-quality advice reaching the most viewers. This study shows that the online information patients see about medical cannabis is often unreliable, and that popularity does not signal accuracy.
In plain language
Study overview
This study looked at a large set of YouTube videos about medical cannabis, the kind of videos patients might watch before deciding whether to try it. The researchers checked who made each video and how trustworthy its information appeared to be.
Findings
The results were mixed, with a clear pattern of poor-quality advice reaching the most viewers. Most videos came from ordinary individuals, and these were the least trustworthy, while the most-watched videos were often the least reliable.
Explore Dr. Caplan's interactive tool detailing cytochrome P450 pathways, clinical titration intervals, and physician surveillance rules.
The deeper readScientific analysis
Background: YouTube has become a major source of health information, with 2.5 billion monthly users. Despite efforts taken to promote reliable sources, misinformation remains prevalent, particularly regarding medical cannabis. Objective: This study aims to evaluate the quality and reliability of medical cannabis information on YouTube and to examine the relationship between video popularity and content quality. Methods: A systematic review of YouTube videos on medical cannabis was conducted. Search terms were selected based on Google Trends, and 800 videos were retrieved on July 8, 2024. After applying exclusion criteria, 516 videos were analyzed. Videos were categorized by content creators: (1) nonmedical educational channels, (2) medical education channels, and (3) independent users. Two independent reviewers (SK and SE) assessed content quality using the DISCERN grade and the Health on the Net (HON) code. Statistical analysis included one-way ANOVA and Pearson correlation coefficient. Results: Of the 516 videos analyzed, 48.5% (n=251) were from the United States, and 17.2% (n=89) from the United Kingdom. Only 12.2% (n=63) were produced by medical education channels, while 84.3% (n=435) were by independent users. The total views reached 119 million, with nonmedical educational channels having the highest median views with 274,957 (IQR 2161-546,887) and medical education channels having the lowest median views at 5721 (IQR 2263 -20,792.50). The mean DISCERN and HON code scores for all videos were 34.63 (SD 9.49) and 3.93 (SD 1.20), respectively. Nonmedical educational creators had the highest DISCERN score (mean 47.78, SD 10.40) and independent users had the lowest score (mean 33.5, SD 8.50; P<.001). Similarly, nonmedical educational creators had the highest HON code score (mean 5.33, SD 1.22), while independent users had the lowest (mean 3.78, SD 1.10; P=.007). Weak positive correlations were found between video views and DISCERN scores (r=0.34, P<.001) and likes and DISCERN scores (r=0.30, P<.001). Conclusions: YouTube is a key source of information on medical cannabis, but the credibility of videos varies widely. Independent users attract the highest viewers but have reduced reliability according to the DISCERN and HON scores. Educational channels, despite increased reliability received the least engagement. The weak correlation between views and content quality emphasizes the need for content moderation to ensure that the most reliable and accurate information on health issues is widely disseminated. Future research should identify strategies to promote verified sources of information and limit misinformation.
The paper
Citation
Khare S, Erridge S, Chidambaram S, Sodergren MH Misinformation About Medical Cannabis in YouTube Videos: Systematic Review. JMIR Formative Research (2025). PubMed 41052415 · DOI
Limitations the authors noted
English-language videos only, limiting generalisability. DISCERN scoring allows subjective interpretation of partial scores. Channel-level and account characteristics not analysed. Only YouTube examined; other platforms not included. Inconsistent reporting of HON means across the abstract (5.33) and results table (5.22). Correlations possibly influenced by outlier videos. Retrieval reflects a single search on one date.
In practice
Why this matters
This study shows that the online information patients see about medical cannabis is often unreliable, and that popularity does not signal accuracy. It does not show what effects medical cannabis actually has, and it only covers English-language YouTube videos at one point in time. Clinicians may use it as a reason to ask patients what they have seen online and to discuss the evidence behind the claims.
Frequently asked questions
Clinical Questions & Answers
What were the primary clinical findings regarding Medical cannabis and Communication?
The results were mixed, with a clear pattern of poor-quality advice reaching the most viewers. Most videos came from ordinary individuals, and these were the least trustworthy, while the most-watched videos were often the least reliable.
What study limitations or clinical safeguards should patients keep in mind?
English-language videos only, limiting generalisability. DISCERN scoring allows subjective interpretation of partial scores. Channel-level and account characteristics not analysed.
Browse related research
Condition: Communication Topic: Medical cannabis
Related on CED Clinic
Back to Daily Research and Patient Questions
Reviewed by Dr. Caplan on November 1, 2026.
This page is general education about a published study. It is not medical advice and does not create a doctor-patient relationship. For care specific to you, book a consultation.