ArticleDigital health
Is information evaluated subjectively? Social media has changed the way users search for medical information.
Article in Digital health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Bilibili and TikTok heart failure short video evaluation: a cross-sectional study.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Quality, reliability, and engagement of COPD-related videos on Chinese short-form video platforms: a cross-sectional content analysis.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- A cross-sectional quality assessment of panic attacks information on Douyin in China.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Use of health information from social media and health self-efficacy: a cross-sectional study.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- #Cartilage: TikTok Videos on Cartilage Surgery Demonstrate Low Quality and Limited Educational Value.Cartilage · 2025Article
- Assessing the quality of myopia prevention videos on Chinese short video platforms: a cross-sectional content analysis by source.BMJ open · 2025Article
- Unsupervised fake news detection on social media using hybrid Gaussian Mixture Model.PloS one · 2025Article
- Article
- Public attention to cardiac arrest in China: A Baidu Index analysis of online search trends and hotspot events.Digital healthArticle
- Article
- Accuracy and Actionability of TikTok Content on Cosmetic Limb Lengthening: A Comparison between Healthcare Professional and Non-professional Sources.Strategies in trauma and limb reconstructionArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: In recent years, social media platforms, such as TikTok and RedBook, have emerged as important channels through which users access and share medical information. Additionally, an increasing number of healthcare professionals have created social media accounts through which to disseminate medical knowledge. This paper explores why users obtain their medical information from social media and how the signals transmitted by social platforms affect use behaviours. Methods: We combined the elaboration likelihood model and signal theories to construct a comprehensive model for this study. We used simple random sampling to investigate users' behaviours related to social media usage. A total of 351 valid questionnaires were completed by people in Mainland China. The participants were enthusiastic about social media platforms and had searched for health-related information on social media in the past three months. We analysed the data using partial least squares structural equation modelling to investigate the influence of two pathways and two signals (objective and subjective judgement pathways and positive and negative signals) on social media use behaviours. Results: When seeking medical information on social media, users tend to rely on subjective judgment rather than objective judgment, although both are influential. Furthermore, in the current era, in which marketing methods involving big data algorithms and artificial intelligence prevail, negative signals, such as information overload, have a more pronounced impact than positive signals. Conclusions: This study demonstrates that the subjective judgment path has a greater impact on users than the objective judgment path. Platforms are encouraged to focus more on users' emotional needs. The paper also discusses the negative impact of information overload on users, sounding an alarm for enterprises to control their use of homogeneous information resulting from the excessive use of big data algorithms.
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.