ArticleNeurourology and urodynamics2024
TikTok misinformation and user engagement in female pelvic floor conditions.
Article in Neurourology and urodynamics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Chinese Mobile Health Apps for Preventing and Managing Pelvic Floor Dysfunction: Quality Assessment and Content Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Social learning theory application and potential in health education conducted by healthcare workers on TikTok - a content analysis observational study.BMC public health · 2026Observational
- Episiotomy on TikTok: Assessing Misinformation and Information Quality Shared on a Popular Social Media Platform.International urogynecology journal · 2026Article
- Perceptions of health misinformation on social media: patterns and predictors.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Quality and reliability of semaglutide-related health information on Chinese short-video platforms: a cross-sectional study of Bilibili and TikTok.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Impacts of Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights Misinformation in Digital Spaces on Human Rights Protection and Promotion: Scoping Review.JMIR infodemiology · 2025Article
- Evaluating the Quality of TikTok Videos on Vitiligo: A Cross-Sectional Study.International journal of dermatology · 2025Article
- Quality, Reliability and Accuracy of Hyperthyroidism-Related Content on Social Media Platform TikTok.Endocrinology, diabetes & metabolism · 2025Article
- 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 · 2025Article
- The Patient, the Provider, and the TikTok Creator: Qualitative Analysis of the Content and Quality of Videos on Prenatal Genetic Screening.Journal of midwifery & women's 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
importanceSocial media platforms are increasingly utilized to distribute medical information. Our study emphasizes the need for accuracy in pelvic health education on social media and the involvement of female pelvic floor (FPF) specialists in content creation.
aimsIn this cross-sectional study, we assessed the FPF TikTok videos with the highest engagement for quality of information and misinformation and investigated the relationship between misinformation and user engagement.
methodsWe collected all TikTok videos on the US app with hashtags related to FPF conditions, including 76 on pelvic organ prolapse, 323 on urinary tract infection, 84 on overactive bladder, and 972 on incontinence. The top 20 videos for each FPF condition were selected based on highest engagement, and 74 videos total met inclusion criteria. TikTok videos were scored with the validated DISCERN instrument for quality of consumer health information and a 5-point Likert scale for misinformation. The correlation between misinformation and user engagement was assessed.
resultsOur analysis revealed positive correlations among higher average misinformation scores and shares (r = 0.37, p < 0.001), likes (r = 0.23, p = 0.004), and overall engagement (r = 0.25, p = 0.002) in FPF TikTok videos as a group, likely driven by the #UTI category. Most TikTok videos (96%) had poor quality of information (DISCERN score < 3), and 18% of TikTok videos contained misinformation.
conclusionThe poor quality and prevalence of misinformation in FPF-related TikTok videos with the highest engagement raise concerns about the propagation of nonevidence-based health information.
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.