Why video worksin health.
Video helps patients understand what they are being asked to decide. Here is what independent research shows, and where it stops.
Patients remember more.
When the science is shown well, more of it sticks.
Eleven of fifteen.
In a review of clinical trials, an explainer video improved what patients remembered in most of them.
J Med Internet Res, 2024
Plus twelve points.
Patient decision aids raised people’s knowledge of their options, measured on a 100-point scale. The review rates this high-certainty evidence.
Cochrane, 2024
Interactivity beats format.
Across 52 trials of medical consent, how much a patient could take part mattered more than the format the information arrived in.
Better information fills trials.
Plus fifty percent.
The odds of joining the trial were about 50% higher when a multimedia version replaced the printed sheet.
BMC Medicine, 2023
The audience already moved.
Attention shifted to video, and health companies are following the money.
Fifty-eight percent.
More B2B marketers name video their best-performing content than any other format.
CMI / MarketingProfs, 2025
Pharma now sits among the biggest advertisers in US digital video, and its spend is growing faster than any of the categories above it.
IAB / Guideline, 2025
Every finding on this page comes from independent published research. Methods and effect sizes vary by study, and the full sources sit below.
What this research looks like in practice is set out in our guide to rare-disease storytelling.
Questions we get.
Does video help patients understand?
Yes, and the effect is clearest for recall and for knowledge of treatment options. The weak spot is durability: most studies test understanding soon after viewing, so how much survives a month later is still open.
Can video improve clinical-trial recruitment?
It can, in one specific way. Swapping the printed information sheet for a multimedia version raised enrolment among children and young people in UK paediatric trials. The same effect has yet to be shown in adults.
What kind of video works best?
Interactivity, more than production value. Asking the patient to answer a question, or to say the plan back in their own words, moves comprehension further than a film they only watch.
Is this your own data?
No. Every study on this page was run and published by other people. Our job is to read it carefully and to make films that respect what it says.
Let’s make yours.
Tell us what you’re working on and we’ll show you what the right film could do.
Full sources and method
- Recall (11 of 15 trials). Hansen S, Jensen TS, Schmidt AM, Strom J, Vistisen P, Hoybye MT. "The Effectiveness of Video Animations as a Tool to Improve Health Information Recall for Patients: A Systematic Review." J Med Internet Res 2024;26:e58306. doi:10.2196/58306. Narrative synthesis of 15 randomised trials (2,454 adults, 10 countries); 11 reported significantly better short-term recall. Heterogeneity precluded meta-analysis, so this is a count of trials reporting significance, not a pooled effect. Recall was mostly measured right after viewing; most studies carried "some concerns" for risk of bias.
- Knowledge (+12 points, high certainty). Stacey D, Lewis KB, Smith M, et al. "Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions." Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2024, Issue 1, Art. No. CD001431. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD001431.pub6. Knowledge outcome: mean difference 11.90/100 (95% CI 10.60-13.19), 107 studies, 25,492 participants, GRADE high certainty; searches to March 2022. "Patient decision aid" spans print, web and video; the review does not report video separately.
- Comprehension by approach (bars). Glaser J, Nouri S, Fernandez A, Sudore RL, Schillinger D, Klein-Fedyshin M, Schenker Y. "Interventions to Improve Patient Comprehension in Informed Consent for Medical and Surgical Procedures: An Updated Systematic Review." Medical Decision Making 2020;40(2):119-143. doi:10.1177/0272989X19896348. 52 randomised and non-randomised controlled trials, 60 interventions; MEDLINE and EMBASE, 2008-2018. Figures are vote-counts of interventions showing a statistically significant improvement over standard consent. They are counts and not effect sizes, and variation precluded a meta-analysis. No study was at low risk of bias for comprehension. Covers consent for procedures and surgery; research consent was excluded.
- Recruitment (OR 1.54). Knapp P, Moe-Byrne T, Martin-Kerry J, et al. "Providing multimedia information to children and young people increases recruitment to trials: pre-planned meta-analysis of SWATs." BMC Medicine 2023;21:244. doi:10.1186/s12916-023-02936-1. TRECA study, funded by NIHR Health and Social Care Delivery Research (14/21/21); ISRCTN73136092. Replacing the printed sheet with multimedia: OR 1.54 (95% CI 1.05-2.28); adding multimedia alongside the sheet: OR 0.89. Six SWATs in UK paediatric host trials; three pooled.
- B2B video (58%). Content Marketing Institute / MarketingProfs, "B2B Content Marketing Benchmarks, Budgets, and Trends: Outlook for 2025" (15th Annual Content Marketing Survey, sponsored by The MX Group). Fielded 25 June-16 August 2024; 1,186 global responses, B2B findings based on 980 respondents, mostly North America. Non-probability, self-selected, unweighted; no margin of error published. Video 58% best-performing, ahead of case studies and customer stories at 53%. Describes general B2B marketers, not a health subgroup.
- Pharma digital video ($6.3B, 4th). IAB & Guideline, "2025 Video Ad Spend Report, Part One" (April 2025). Estimated US digital video ad spend by category; pharma fourth behind consumer goods, retail and technology, about $6.3 billion, growing 19% a year, the fastest of the top five categories.