ArticleBMC public health2024
YouTube/ Bilibili/ TikTok videos as sources of medical information on laryngeal carcinoma: cross-sectional content analysis study.
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 128 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
128 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Prostate cancer research on social media platforms: a bibliometric and thematic analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Pooled it
- Evaluating influenza-related short videos on Chinese platforms: information quality, user engagement, and public health implications.NPJ primary care respiratory medicine · 2026Article
- The quality and reliability of acne-related information on Douyin and Bilibili: A cross-sectional study.Medicine · 2026Article
- YouTube, TikTok, and Bilibili as sources of medical information on lumbar spinal stenosis: A cross-sectional content analysis study.Medicine · 2026Article
- Evaluating the reliability and quality of lupus nephritis educational content on TikTok and Bilibili: a cross-sectional content analysis.Lupus science & medicine · 2026Article
- Baloxavir marboxil-related information on Douyin and Xiaohongshu: a cross-sectional analysis of content, misinformation, and user engagement.Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2026Article
- Quality and reliability of cervical spondylotic myelopathy-related content on TikTok and Bilibili: A cross-sectional analysis.Medicine · 2026Article
- Quality and content evaluation of anal fistula information on TikTok and Bilibili: A cross-sectional study.Medicine · 2026Article
- Content quality and reliability of mental health videos for cancer patients on social media platforms: a cross-sectional study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026Article
- Article
- Article
- Quality assessment of ADHD-related short videos on Chinese social media: A cross-sectional study.Medicine · 2026Article
- Quality assessment of public education short videos on robot-assisted cholecystectomy and analysis of audience preferences.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Quality of Allergic Rhinitis Content Across Social Media Platforms.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2026Article
- TikTok, RedNote, and Bilibili as sources of medical information on chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a cross-platform content analysis.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Article
- Driving Revisit Intentions Through Medical Information and Service Quality in General Hospitals: An Extended Technology Acceptance Model Approach.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Evaluating the quality, reliability and readability of digital and artificial intelligence resources for adults with cancer who have significant caregiving responsibilities for children.PLOS digital health · 2026Article
- TikTok, Xiaohongshu, and Bilibili as sources of medical information on lung cancer: a multi-platform content evaluation.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Article
- Evaluating the content quality and trustworthiness of snakebite envenomation videos on social media platforms: insights from TikTok and Bilibili.Tropical medicine and health · 2026Article
- Videos on Bilibili, TikTok, and Xiaohongshu as Sources of Medical Information on Adenoid Hypertrophy: Cross-Sectional Content Analysis.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
68 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundYouTube, a widely recognized global video platform, is inaccessible in China, whereas Bilibili and TikTok are popular platforms for long and short videos, respectively. There are many videos related to laryngeal carcinoma on these platforms. This study aims to identify upload sources, contents, and feature information of these videos on YouTube, Bilibili, and TikTok, and further evaluate the video quality.
methodsOn January 1, 2024, we searched the top 100 videos by default sort order (300 videos in total) with the terms "laryngeal carcinoma" and "throat cancer" on YouTube, "" on Bilibili and TikTok. Videos were screened for relevance and similarity. Video characteristics were documented, and quality was assessed by using the Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT), Video Information and Quality Index (VIQI), Global Quality Score (GQS), and modified DISCERN (mDISCERN).
resultsThe analysis included 99 YouTube videos, 76 from Bilibili, and 73 from TikTok. Median video lengths were 193 s (YouTube), 136 s (Bilibili), and 42 s (TikTok). TikTok videos demonstrated higher audience interaction. Bilibili had the lowest ratio of original contents (69.7%). Treatment was the most popular topic on YouTube and Bilibili, while that was the prognosis on TikTok. Solo narration was the most common video style across all platforms. Video uploaders were predominantly non-profit organizations (YouTube), self-media (Bilibili), and doctors (TikTok), with TikTok authors having the highest certification rate (83.3%). Video quality, assessed using PEMAT, VIQI, GQS, and mDISCERN, varied across platforms, with YouTube generally showing the highest scores. Videos from professional authors performed better than videos from non-professionals based on the GQS and mDISCERN scores. Spearman correlation analysis showed no strong relationships between the video quality and the audience interaction.
conclusionsVideos on social media platforms can help the public learn about the knowledge of laryngeal cancer to some extent. TikTok achieves the best flow, but videos on YouTube are of the best quality. However, the video quality across all platforms still needs enhancement. We need more professional uploaders to ameliorate the video quality related to laryngeal carcinoma. Content creators also should be aware of the certification, the originality, and the style of video shooting. As for the platforms, refining the algorithm will allow users to receive more high-quality videos.
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.