ArticleDigital health
Quality assessment of temporomandibular disorders-related information on Chinese social media: A cross-sectional study.
Article in Digital health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Quality, readability, and transparency of Arabic online health information on temporomandibular disorders: An infodemiological analysis of 408 websites.Journal of Taibah University Medical Sciences · 2026Article
- A cross-sectional analysis of the quality and reliability of Wilson disease videos on Bilibili, Douyin, and Kuaishou.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Platform-mediated patient access to apical surgery information on Chinese short-video platforms: a cross-sectional study of clinical accuracy, transparency, and misinformation risk.Frontiers in oral health · 2026Article
- Targeted online health information was associated with more severe temporomandibular disorders.Journal of oral & facial pain and headache · 2025Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Temporomandibular disorders (TMDs) affect people's quality of life greatly, and precise understanding of TMDs contributes to a proper treatment choice. Social media is an access to health information, hence it is needed to evaluate the quality of relative information on social media. Objective: This research aims to assess the quality of information about TMDs understood by the public on two mainstream social media platforms, WeChat and Zhihu. They will be evaluated from four aspects: readability, credibility, concreteness, and accuracy. Methods: Researchers searched for relative articles on WeChat and Zhihu and selected the samples. The readability was evaluated separately, and the DISCERN instrument was employed to evaluate the credibility and concreteness. Accuracy was measured by comparing samples with authoritative journals and textbooks. The Health On the Net code of conduct for medical and health websites (HONcode) and Global Quality Scale (GQS) were used as supplemental tools. Two researchers conducted this process independently, the intraclass correlation coefficient was used to examine the consistency. Results: One hundred and eleven articles were included, with 47 articles from WeChat, 64 from Zhihu. For readability, the articles received a mean score of 27.79 (standard deviation (SD) 2.99) out of 35. The DISCERN instrument reported a mean score of 38.52 (SD 7.13) out of 80. As for accuracy, most articles (92 of 111) got 3.5 or more out of 5, demonstrating that the two platforms did well in this area. HONcode reported a mean score of 6.29 out of 16 (SD 1.42) while GQS showed a mean score of 2.91 out of 5 (SD 0.77), indicating the reliability needs improvements, and these articles can only provide limited help to the public. Conclusions: The quality of TMDs-related information from WeChat and Zhihu is generally low. Although they do well on accuracy and readability, the credibility and concreteness still need further improvements. And different improvements and suggestions are recommended for uploaders and platforms.
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.