Objective This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy, completeness, and clinical usefulness of YouTube (Alphabet Inc., Mountain View, CA) videos about cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome (CHS). Methods This cross-sectional study assessed YouTube videos that were identified using standardized CHS-related search terms and predefined eligibility criteria. Trained reviewers used an author-developed CHS content checklist and a global usefulness scale for each video, with any discrepant or complex cases resolved by medical toxicologists. Outcomes included accuracy across key CHS domains, overall clinical usefulness, and the association between video quality and basic engagement metrics. Results A total of 97 videos were analyzed, with a mean length of 9.8 minutes and a cumulative view count of 795,264. Only 25.8% of videos were rated as useful and 2.1% as exemplary, whereas 52.6% were rated not useful and 19.6% as misleading due to missing essential content and/or unsubstantiated claims. Personal testimonial videos were common and often combined accurate symptom descriptions with speculative etiologies and non-evidence-based management advice. Engagement metrics showed little meaningful association with reviewer-rated accuracy or usefulness, and several of the most-viewed videos contained substantial misinformation. Interrater agreement for key classifications was substantial (κ = 0.78). Conclusions CHS-related information on YouTube shows considerable variation in quality, and most videos provide incomplete or inaccurate guidance regarding diagnosis and management. Patients relying on these videos may encounter persuasive narratives that normalize symptoms or promote ineffective or harmful management strategies rather than encouraging cannabis cessation and medical evaluation. Clinicians should anticipate that patients have likely been exposed to such content, directly address misconceptions, and guide them toward vetted educational resources. High-quality, expert-developed CHS content is needed to improve the reliability of information available on social media platforms.
Dean et al. (Mon,) studied this question.