That paper is "retracted": https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1201971221009887 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S120197122...

That paper is "retracted": https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1201971221009887 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S120197122... IIUC it was retracted before the video was created. So that would be an example of "spreading misinformation" (assuming the ordering is as I think). But further, this is a perfect example of why doctors on the internet shouldn't be making videos from single papers that don't actually say what you might think they say. Most people on the internet are not capable of evaluating these sorts of things.