ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2021
Evaluation of the Liver Disease Information in Baidu Encyclopedia and Wikipedia: Longitudinal Study.
Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of Large Language Models in Generating Physical Exercise Rehabilitation Programs for Musculoskeletal Disorders Across Multiple Clinical Scenarios.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- The reach-rigor paradox in health communication: a comparative analysis of congenital heart disease content quality and engagement on TikTok and Bilibili.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2026Article
- The quality of video information related to smoking cessation on mainstream short-video platforms in China: a cross-sectional study.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Quality and reliability of weight management short videos on TikTok and Bilibili: cross-sectional study.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Hidden misinformation in YouTube short videos on syphilis: A mixed-methods study.PEC innovation · 2025Article
- Quality of information in osteoporosis videos on TikTok: a cross-sectional study.Archives of osteoporosis · 2025Article
- Internet Health Information-Seeking Trend of Urinary Incontinence in Mainland China: Infodemiology Study.JMIR formative research · 2025Article
- Quality and reliability evaluation of pancreatic cancer-related video content on social short video platforms: a cross-sectional study.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Popular science and education of cosmetic surgery in China: Quality and reliability evaluation of Douyin short videos.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2023Article
- Public Awareness of the Fencing Response as an Indicator of Traumatic Brain Injury: Quantitative Study of Twitter and Wikipedia Data.JMIR formative research · 2023Article
- Quality of Information in Gallstone Disease Videos on TikTok: Cross-sectional Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Article
- Translating and Adapting the DISCERN Instrument Into a Simplified Chinese Version and Validating Its Reliability: Development and Usability Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Article
- Evaluation of Medical Information on Male Sexual Dysfunction on Baidu Encyclopedia and Wikipedia: Comparative Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2022Article
- Short-Video Apps as a Health Information Source for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: Information Quality Assessment of TikTok Videos.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021Article
- The quality and reliability of short videos about thyroid nodules on BiliBili and TikTok: Cross-sectional study.Digital healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe internet has changed the way of people acquiring health information. Previous studies have shown that Wikipedia is a reasonably reliable medical resource, and it has been ranked higher than other general websites in various search engines. Baidu Encyclopedia is one of the most popular encyclopedia websites in China. However, no studies have shown the quality of the content provided in the Baidu Encyclopedia.
objectiveThis study aimed to evaluate the quality of liver disease information provided by Wikipedia (in English) and Baidu Encyclopedia (in Chinese) and to perform a comparison of the quality and timeliness of the articles published in these two encyclopedias. Moreover, a 3-year follow-up study was conducted to compare if the information in both these websites was updated regularly over this period.
methodsWe searched for information on liver diseases by using the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems 10th Revision Version 2016 codes on Wikipedia (in English) and Baidu Encyclopedia (in Chinese). The quality of the articles was assessed using the DISCERN instrument, which consists of 3 sections. We recorded the latest editing date of the webpages and calculated the date interval to evaluate the update timeliness of these websites.
resultsWe found 22 entries on liver diseases in Baidu Encyclopedia and 15 articles in Wikipedia between September 15, 2016, and September 30, 2016, and we found 25 entries in Baidu Encyclopedia and 16 articles in Wikipedia between September 15, 2019, and September 30, 2019. In section 1 of the DISCERN instrument, the mean (SE) scores of Baidu Encyclopedia entries were significantly lower than those of Wikipedia articles. In section 2 and section 3 of the DISCERN instrument, the DISCERN scores of Baidu Encyclopedia entries were lower than those of Wikipedia articles, but the differences were not statistically significant. The total DISCERN scores of Baidu Encyclopedia entries were significantly lower than those of Wikipedia articles. The update interval of the entries in Baidu Encyclopedia was found to be significantly longer than that of the articles in Wikipedia.
conclusionsThis study shows that the quality of articles and the reliability of the research content on liver diseases in Wikipedia are better than those of the entries in Baidu Encyclopedia. However, the quality of the treatment choices provided in both Wikipedia and Baidu Encyclopedia is not satisfactory. Wikipedia is updated more frequently than Baidu Encyclopedia, thereby ensuring that the information presented has the most recent research findings. The findings of our study suggest that in order to find accurate health information, it is important to seek the help of medical professionals instead of looking for a prescription amid the confusing information provided on the internet.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.