In this digital era, dental students often search for online resources for self-directed learning. YouTube is one of the most commonly sought online platforms for educational or instructional videos. No prior study has examined the validity of panoramic radiography videos available on YouTube. This study provides a content analysis of these YouTube videos. A search for relevant YouTube videos was conducted in April 2022. The search string was: (panoramic OR pan OR OPG) AND (dental OR dentistry OR X-ray). The first 100 videos that resulted from the search and their related videos were screened. Exclusion criteria included irrelevance (e.g., no demonstration of panoramic radiography procedures) and non-English videos. For each included video, the following parameters were recorded: image receptor type, patient age, patient type (real patient, animation, or phantom head), patient preparation procedures, machine preparation, patient positioning, and operator safety. The number of views, comments, likes, and channel subscribers were recorded, as well as the video duration and the age of the video. Forty videos were included and analyzed. Most of the videos demonstrated digital panoramic radiography with an adult patient. Procedures on the patient and machine preparations as well as patient positioning were generally explained well. However, most videos did not well-demonstrate operator safety details concerning the use of adequate personal protective equipment. View count, comment count, and channel subscriber count positively correlated with the like count. Clinicians and students should carefully critique the content of such instructional videos and refer to the contents from other sources such as user manuals and latest recommendations from local authorities.

No prior study has evaluated the content of YouTube videos that demonstrated how to take periapical radiographs, one of the commonest radiographic examinations in dentistry. This study provided a content analysis on these YouTube videos. Three separate searches were performed with the following search strings: (1) posterior periapical, (2) molar periapical, and (3) anterior periapical. The videos resulting from the searches were sorted by view count, and their related videos (as listed by YouTube on the right of the screen) were also screened. Exclusion criteria included irrelevance to periapical radiography, no real patient involved, no demonstration of periapical radiography procedures), non-English video, and duplicate videos. Finally, 21 videos were included and analyzed. For each included video, the following aspects were evaluated: general settings (types of image receptor, patient age, and radiographic technique), patient preparation, machine preparation, receptor placement, and operator safety. All but one were demonstrated with an adult patient. The videos were largely based on digital imaging with the use of either intraoral sensors or phosphor plates, and mostly used paralleling technique. Several common issues were identified, such as not removing the metallic objects from the patient’s head and neck region, not showing the selection of radiation dose, not placing the orientation dot on the film or phosphor plate on the occlusal side, and not wearing proper personal protective equipment. More instructional videos are definitely required. Future videos should eliminate these issues, and also demonstrate with pediatric patients. Perhaps the dental radiology department of a well-established university should be enticed to produce an instructional video that presents the technique in a flawless presentation, to facilitate the learning of dental students, dental hygienists and dental assistants who have yet to master their skills.