ArticleBMC public health2024
Evaluation of TikTok videos on acute pancreatitis: content quality and reliability analysis.
Article in BMC public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The effect of source expertise on the persuasiveness and sharing of health information on social media: A systematic review.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2026Pooled it
- Quality and content evaluation of male HPV infection on Bilibili and TikTok: a cross-sectional study.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Quality and dissemination of nasopharyngeal cancer health information on TikTok and Bilibili: Cross-sectional study.Medicine · 2026Article
- Cross-sectional analysis of the quality of hemodialysis short videos on TikTok.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Content, quality, and reliability of gout-related videos on TikTok and Bilibili: A cross-sectional study.Medicine · 2026Article
- Quality evaluation of health science popularization short videos related to cerebrovascular diseases on popular short video platforms in China: cross-sectional study.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Quality and Reliability of Deep Venous Thrombosis-Related Videos on TikTok and Bilibili.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2026Article
- Assessing the scientific quality of radiotherapy popularization videos on BiliBili and TikTok: a cross-sectional study.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Quality and dissemination of thyroid cancer information on short-video platforms a cross-platform evaluation.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Assessment of the reliability and quality of pancreatic cancer related short videos on mainstream platforms: cross-sectional study.BMC cancer · 2025Article
- The quality and reliability of short videos about hypertension on TikTok: a cross-sectional study.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Quality and reliability of pediatric pneumonia related short videos on mainstream platforms: cross-sectional study.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Evaluating the quality of TikTok videos on coronary artery disease using various scales to examine correlations with video characteristics and high-quality content.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Educational performance of TikTok short videos for age related macular degeneration and its link to user engagement.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Quality, reliability, and dissemination of lung cancer information on short-video platforms in China: a cross-platform content analysis of TikTok, Kwai, and Rednote.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Descriptive analysis of TikTok content on vaccination in Arabic.AIMS public health · 2025Article
- Search engines and short video apps as sources of information on acute pancreatitis in China: quality assessment and content assessment.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Evaluation of the content and quality of schizophrenia on TikTok: a cross-sectional study.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAcute pancreatitis (AP) is a common acute digestive system disorder, with patients often turning to TikTok for AP-related information. However, the platform's video quality on AP has not been thoroughly investigated.
objectiveThe main purpose of this study is to evaluate the quality of videos about AP on TikTok, and the secondary purpose is to study the related factors of video quality.
methodsThis study involved retrieving AP-related videos from TikTok, determining, and analyzing them based on predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Relevant data were extracted and compiled for evaluation. Video quality was scored using the DISCERN instrument and the Health on the Net (HONcode) score, complemented by introducing the Acute Pancreatitis Content Score (APCS). Pearson correlation analysis was used to assess the correlation between video quality scores and user engagement metrics such as likes, comments, favorites, retweets, and video duration.
resultsA total of 111 TikTok videos were included for analysis, and video publishers were composed of physicians (89.18%), news media organizations (13.51%), individual users (5.41%), and medical institutions (0.9%). The majority of videos focused on AP-related educational content (64.87%), followed by physicians' diagnostic and treatment records (15.32%), and personal experiences (19.81%). The mean scores for DISCERN, HONcode, and APCS were 33.05 ± 7.87, 3.09 ± 0.93, and 1.86 ± 1.30, respectively. The highest video scores were those posted by physicians (35.17 ± 7.02 for DISCERN, 3.31 ± 0.56 for HONcode, and 1.94 ± 1.34 for APCS, respectively). According to the APCS, the main contents focused on etiology (n = 55, 49.5%) and clinical presentations (n = 36, 32.4%), followed by treatment (n = 24, 21.6%), severity (n = 20, 18.0%), prevention (n = 19, 17.1%), pathophysiology (n = 17, 15.3%), definitions (n = 13, 11.7%), examinations (n = 10, 9%), and other related content. There was no correlation between the scores of the three evaluation tools and the number of followers, likes, comments, favorites, and retweets of the video. However, DISCERN (r = 0.309) and APCS (r = 0.407) showed a significant positive correlation with video duration, while HONcode showed no correlation with the duration of the video.
conclusionsThe general quality of TikTok videos related to AP is poor; however, the content posted by medical professionals shows relatively higher quality, predominantly focusing on clinical presentations and etiologies. There is a discernible correlation between video duration and quality ratings, indicating that a combined approach incorporating the guideline can comprehensively evaluate AP-related content on TikTok.
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.