Digital information quality in dental implant surgery: a global cross-sectional study of reliability, readability, and infodemiological trends

Aims: To evaluate the reliability, quality, readability, and infodemiological profile of online information on dental implant surgery across web pages and video-sharing platforms. Methods: A global cross-sectional analysis was conducted using Google Search, YouTube, and Google Trends data. Searches were performed for implant-related terms including “dental implant surgery,” “dental implant risks,” “dental implant cost,” and “all-on-4 dental implants.” A total of 360 online sources were analyzed: 240 websites and 120 YouTube videos. Website and video quality were assessed using the 16-item DISCERN instrument (score range, 16-80), Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmark criteria (score range, 0-4), the Global Quality Scale (GQS; score range, 1-5), an implant-specific content completeness score (score range, 0-12), and readability indices. Google Trends relative search volume (RSV) data from 2019 to 2025 were used to describe public interest patterns. Results: Websites showed higher reliability than videos according to DISCERN scores, but overall quality remained moderate to low for both formats. Mean DISCERN scores were 43.6±12.4 for websites and 34.9±11.7 for videos (p<0.001). Academic and professional society sources had the highest quality scores, whereas commercial and clinic-marketing sources had significantly lower scores (p<0.001). Only 18.3% of all sources were classified as high quality. Information on cost was common, whereas complications, peri-implantitis, alternative treatments, maintenance, and long-term prognosis were frequently incomplete. Readability exceeded the recommended patient level in most sources. Google Trends showed a marked increase in searches for “dental implant cost” and “all-on-4 dental implants,” particularly after 2021. Conclusion: Online information on dental implant surgery is widely available but often incomplete, commercially weighted, and difficult for patients to interpret. Clinician-guided digital literacy and evidence-based online resources are needed.