Assessment of the Quality, Reliability, and Educational Value of YouTube Videos on Nutrition During Orthodontic Treatment: A Cross-Sectional Study

When a person begins the journey of straightening their teeth, the work of the orthodontist is only half the battle. The other half happens in the kitchen and at the dinner table. Patients wearing braces are routinely told to avoid certain foods that could bend wires, pop off brackets, or damage the enamel of their teeth. Hard candies, sticky caramels, and crunchy apples are often on the forbidden list, while softer alternatives are encouraged. This dietary discipline is not merely a suggestion; it is a critical part of ensuring the treatment finishes on time and without complications. For decades, this guidance has come directly from the dentist's chair, delivered during appointments and printed on handouts. But in recent years, the source of information has shifted. As people increasingly turn to the internet to solve health problems, many patients and their families now look to video-sharing platforms for answers, hoping to find clear instructions on what they can and cannot eat while wearing braces.

The challenge with this digital shift is that anyone can upload a video. Unlike a textbook or a peer-reviewed medical journal, these platforms do not require the creator to have medical training or to verify their facts. A video might look professional and sound convincing, yet contain advice that is outdated, incomplete, or simply wrong. For a patient trying to navigate a complex treatment plan, the difference between a helpful video and a misleading one can mean the difference between a smooth treatment and a broken bracket that requires an emergency visit. This is the reality that researchers set out to investigate, asking a straightforward question: if a patient searches for advice on eating with braces on YouTube, what kind of information are they actually getting?

To find the answer, a team of researchers from Usak University in Turkey conducted a systematic review of the videos available on the platform. They did not simply watch a few popular clips; they approached the task with the rigor of a clinical audit. On a specific day in late April 2026, they searched for videos using four different phrases related to nutrition and braces, such as "what to eat with braces" and "braces diet." They cast a wide net, initially gathering 240 videos. However, they applied strict rules to ensure the data was useful. They removed any video that was not in English, too short to contain real advice, too long to hold a viewer's attention, or lacking audio. They also filtered out videos that were clearly jokes or satires, as well as those that had nothing to do with the topic. After this careful screening, 100 videos remained for detailed analysis.

Two researchers then watched each of these 100 videos independently. They were not just looking for entertainment; they were scoring the content based on specific criteria. They evaluated how well the video was made, whether the information was accurate, and if the advice was balanced and reliable. They also created a checklist of ten essential topics that a good dietary guide should cover, such as explaining why hard foods are dangerous, suggesting safe soft foods, and addressing what to do if pain occurs after an adjustment. Each video was given a score based on how many of these essential points it covered. The researchers also checked who had made the video, categorizing the sources as orthodontists or dental professionals, academic institutions, companies or brands, regular people, or patients sharing their own experiences.

The results of this analysis painted a clear, if somewhat concerning, picture. The vast majority of the videos, 85 percent, were rated as being of low to moderate quality. This means that for most patients searching for help, the information they found was either incomplete or not reliable enough to be the sole source of their guidance. The average video covered only about half of the essential dietary topics the researchers had identified. While some videos were excellent, they were the exception rather than the rule. The study found that the videos with the highest quality and most complete information were almost exclusively those created by healthcare professionals, such as orthodontists and dentists. Videos made by companies, regular people, or patients sharing their personal stories tended to be less comprehensive and less reliable.

Interestingly, the researchers discovered that popularity does not equal quality. They looked at how many times each video had been viewed, how many people had liked it, and how many comments it had received. They found no connection between these numbers and the accuracy or helpfulness of the advice. A video could have millions of views and thousands of likes while still offering poor or incomplete dietary guidance. Conversely, a video with very few views could contain the most accurate and complete information available. This suggests that the algorithms that decide which videos people see are driven by engagement and entertainment value, not by medical correctness. The only factor that showed a slight link to quality was the length of the video; slightly longer videos tended to be a bit better organized, but even this difference was small.

The study also highlighted a gap in the information available. While many videos mentioned avoiding hard foods, very few addressed specific scenarios that patients actually face, such as what to eat when their teeth are sore after a tightening appointment or how to handle an emergency situation like a broken wire. The videos that did cover these practical, real-world problems were almost always made by professionals. The researchers noted that the videos produced by brands or companies often focused on the product itself rather than the patient's health needs, and videos from regular people often lacked the depth required for safe medical advice.

The implications of these findings are significant for anyone undergoing orthodontic treatment. Because the available online content is largely of low to moderate quality, patients cannot rely on YouTube as a primary source of dietary instruction. The risk is that a patient might follow a popular video that suggests a food is safe when it is not, or miss a crucial warning about a specific type of food that could damage their appliance. The researchers concluded that the most effective path forward is for patients to be directed back to their clinicians for this specific type of advice. They suggested that orthodontists should actively ask their patients where they are getting their information and correct any misconceptions found online. Furthermore, the study calls on professional organizations and dental societies to take a more active role in creating high-quality, accessible video content. By producing their own reliable videos, these groups could fill the gap left by the unregulated nature of the platform, ensuring that patients have access to information that is both easy to find and medically sound. In a world where digital content is ubiquitous, the study serves as a reminder that while the internet offers vast resources, the quality of those resources varies wildly, and in matters of health, the source of the information matters just as much as the information itself.