Analysis of the Topic of Vaginal Aesthetics in YouTube Videos Between 2020 and 2026
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18883055Keywords:
Vaginoplasty, Youtube, Esthetics, GynecologicAbstract
Objective:The objective of this study is to analyze the temporal trends, viewership metrics, and uploader profiles of vaginal aesthetics videos published on YouTube between 2020 and 2026. This analysis will provide insight into the evolution of digital health information in this field.
Methods: A Python-based web scraping algorithm, customized for the specific purpose of this study, was employed in conjunction with the YouTube Data API v3 to identify 858 videos. The identification of these videos was facilitated by the use of keywords, including "Vaginal Aesthetics," "Labiaplasty," and "Vaginoplasty." A rigorous quantitative analysis was conducted, encompassing various metrics such as view counts, interaction indices, and uploader titles. These titles included designations such as "Prof. Dr.," "Op. Dr.," and "Corporate/Media." The analysis was carried out using both SPSS and Python, two widely utilized software programs in the field.
Results: A total of 45.90% of the channels were accounted for by corporate, media, or individual accounts lacking medical titles. A statistically significant discrepancy was identified between uploader titles and view counts ($F(4, 853) = 4.37, p = .002$). The corporate and media channels received the highest average views ($M = 186,287.42$), while the Operator Doctors (Op. Dr.) had the lowest ($M = 6,211.77$), despite being the most productive group ($n = 282$). The average daily viewing rate exhibited a substantial increase, rising from 7.67 in 2020 to 252.30 in 2024. The interaction index remained low (0.60%–1.50%), suggesting passive consumption due to the sensitive nature of the topic.
Conclusion: There is an increasing public interest in vaginal aesthetics, yet viewers prioritize institutional brands and high academic titles (e.g., professors) over individual specialists. The observation of low interaction rates on YouTube suggests that patients primarily utilize the platform as a source of private information rather than as a social medium.
References
1. Sonny, S., Vaginal and Perineal Rejuvenation: Understanding Aesthetic Gynecology. Indonesian Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 2022: p. 3-4. 10.32771/inajog.v10i1.1698
2. Aggarwal, D., An Evolving Era of Aesthetic Gynaecology. International journal of scientific and research publications, 2022. 12(9): p. 54-56. 10.29322/ijsrp.12.09.2022.p12907
3. Genital, F., Imagem corporal e imagem. 2015.
4. Erich, K. and K. Hoffmann, Weibliche Genitalästhetik: Vergleich der Präferenzen von Männern und Frauen. 2019. 12(2): p. 95-103. 10.1007/S12631-018-0123-X
5. Magdalena, S. and O.C. Helen, Female genital cosmetic surgery: a social trend driving surgical practice. BJUI, 2024. 10.1111/bju.16551
6. Maggie, K., D. Amy, K. McDonald, W. Amy, W. Pramasari, and R.W.F. Jane, Health professionals’ and beauty therapists’ perspectives on female genital cosmetic surgery: an interview study. BMC Women's Health, 2023. 23. 10.1186/s12905-023-02744-y
7. Gianna, W. and B. Deborah, Vaginal Rejuvenation: A Review of Female Genital Cosmetic Surgery. Obstetrical & Gynecological Survey, 2018. 73(5): p. 287-292. 10.1097/OGX.0000000000000559
8. Bazarova Zarina, Z., Advances in aesthetic gynaecology in the modern world. International journal of medical sciences and clinical research, 2024. 4(10): p. 25-29. 10.37547/ijmscr/volume04issue10-05
9. Shazia, I., A. Khalid, B. Bushra, H. Ghaiath, E. Manal Khalid Kamal Ali, A. Atheer, and A. Balqees Sami Khaza’l, Awareness about Vulvovaginal Aesthetics Procedures among Medical Students and Health Professionals in Saudi Arabia. 2022.
10. Vaginal Rejuvenation. 2022. p. 587-613.
11. Zheng, H., Y. Yin, Z. Qi, W. Liu, L. Li, Q. Bian, D. Meng, Y. Wang, J. Yao, B. Pan, and S. Lu, Search-based UGC (user generated content) recommendation method and search-based UGC recommendation system. 2014.
12. Garen, C., Video recommendation based on video titles. 2015.
13. Zafi Sherhan, S., S.B. Asghar, and S. Muhammad Shehram Shah, Leveraging Natural Language Processing For Public Health Screening On YouTube: A COVID-19 Case Study. arXiv.org, 2023. abs/2306.01164. 10.48550/arXiv.2306.01164
14. Mohamed, M. and L. Georges, Extraction de mots-clefs dans des vidéos Web par Analyse Latente de Dirichlet. 2012.
15. Mohamed, M. and L. Georges. A LDA-based method for automatic tagging of Youtube videos. 2013.
16. Keunyoung, L. and J. Boomin, LDA topic modeling analysis of YouTube content with the keywords “child” & “kids”. 2024. 10.20437/koaece29-1-08
17. Namkil, K., English learning in big data: a keyword analysis in 80 youtube videos. International journal of research - granthaalayah, 2022. 10(11). 10.29121/granthaalayah.v10.i11.2022.4864
18. Varun, K., G. Ashutosh, and S. David Petrie, Spam detection for user-generated multimedia items based on keyword stuffing. 2008.
19. Dersuneli, Y. and D. Turgut, Mapping the Digital Visibility of Maladaptive Daydreaming: A Quantitative Analysis of YouTube Videos (2020–2025). Acta Medica Young Doctors, 2025. 1(3). 10.5281/zenodo.17591547
20. Zortuk, O., Impact Characteristics of Pneumothorax Videos Published on YouTube: 2020-2025. Acta Medica Young Doctors, 2025. 1(3): p. 43-49. 10.5281/zenodo.17608045
21. Turkoglu, S. and A. Say, Quality and Reliability of YouTube Videos on Uterine Fibroid Embolization: A Cross-Sectional Analysis. Acta Medica Young Doctors, 2025. 1(3). 10.5281/zenodo.17876692
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Çağlayan Biçer
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
