Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36407987›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in public health2022

TikTok and YouTube as sources of information on anal fissure: A comparative analysis.

Zeyang Chen, Shaorong Pan, Shuai Zuo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 42 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
42citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

42 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Assessing quality, reliability and accuracy of polycystic ovary syndrome-related content on TikTok: A video-based cross-sectional analysis.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2025
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Zeyang ChenDepartment of General Surgery, Peking University First Hospital, Peking University, Beijing, China.
Shaorong PanDepartment of General Surgery, Peking University First Hospital, Peking University, Beijing, China.
Shuai ZuoDepartment of General Surgery, Peking University First Hospital, Peking University, Beijing, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Anal fissure is a common colorectal disease impacting patients' life quality with high incidence. Social media platforms are becoming a kind of health information source nowadays. This study aims to evaluate and compare the quality of anal fissure-related videos on TikTok and YouTube. Materials and methods: One hundred videos were sourced from TikTok and YouTube, respectively and videos were screened further. The completeness of six types of content within the videos is assessed, including the definition of disease, symptoms, risk factors, evaluation, management and outcomes. Finally, the DISCERN instrument, Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool and Global Quality scale are used to assess video display quality and content. A correlation analysis is undertaken considering the video features, DISCERN, PEMAT and GQS scores. Results: Physicians and non-profit organizations contributed almost all video content among selected videos. A statistically significant correlation between DISCERN classification and duration, PEMAT understandability, PEMAT actionability and GQS scores is recorded. DISCERN total scores were significantly positively correlated with video duration, PEMAT understandability, PEMAT actionability and GQS scores. GQS scores were significantly positively correlated with duration, PEMAT understandability and PEMAT actionability scores. For content, the videos mainly described management and symptoms while containing limited information on the disease evaluation, and outcomes. Conclusions: The sources of uploaders on YouTube are more diverse than TikTok, and the quality of videos is also relatively higher on YouTube. Even so, the video quality of the two platforms still needs to be further improved. Health information without integrity, reliability and practicability impacts patients' disease perception and health-seeking behavior, leading to serious consequences. Much effort must be taken to improve the quality of videos regarding anal fissures on the two platforms, which will facilitate the development of public health education on this issue.

Indexed as

Fissure in AnoSocial MediaHumansReproducibility of ResultsVideo Recordinganal fissureinternetqualityTikTokYouTube

Identifiers

PMID36407987
PMCPMC9669434

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.