ArticleFrontiers in public health2025
Assessing the quality of educational short videos on dry eye care: a cross-sectional study.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 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
17 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Cross-Sectional Study of Short-Video Viewing and Young Adult Health: Dose-Response Relationships with Sleep, Dream Anxiety, Ocular Surface, and Quality of Life.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- The quality of video information related to smoking cessation on mainstream short-video platforms in China: a cross-sectional study.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Assessment of quality, reliability, and interactive characteristics of age-related macular degeneration short videos on TikTok: a cross-sectional study.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Benchmark evaluation of video large language models in quality assessment of science popularization videos for dry eye.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Popularity versus quality in TikTok educational videos on congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Quality assessment of dry eye educational videos on Xiaohongshu and differences by uploader type.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Article
- Educational performance of TikTok short videos for age related macular degeneration and its link to user engagement.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Evaluating the quality of educational TikTok videos on diabetic retinopathy: a cross-sectional study.Frontiers in public health · 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
- The quality and reliability of herpes zoster information on TikTok and Bilibili: A cross-sectional study.Digital healthArticle
- The quality and reliability of keloid-related videos on TikTok: A cross-sectional study.Digital healthArticle
- TikTok, Bilibili, and Xiaohongshu as sources of information on frailty: Cross-sectional content analysis study.Digital healthArticle
- Review
- Quality and reliability evaluation of chikungunya fever-related video content on Tiktok and Bilibili: A cross-sectional study.Digital healthArticle
- Article
- Insights into the quality and guideline consistency of dry eye disease treatment videos on Chinese short-video platforms.Digital 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Short video social media platforms play a crucial role in public health by effectively disseminating health information. Despite this, many educational videos on dry eye care have not received sufficient attention. This study aimed to conduct a comprehensive analysis and evaluate the quality of educational short videos on dry eye care available on TikTok. Methods: On August 30, 2024, the top 200 videos related to dry eye were viewed from the Chinese version of TikTok using the platform's default ranking. The overall quality, reliability, comprehensibility, and applicability of the videos are systematically evaluated using the DISCERN and PEMAT-A/V assessment tools. Results: A total of 199 videos were included in the study and categorized based on account information: medical professional individual users, general professional individual users, for-profit organizations, non-profit organizations, and news organizations. Medical professionals were the predominant uploaders, contributing 81% of the videos. The overall misinformation rate was 2%. A majority of the videos (85.9%) addressed at least two aspects of dry eye, while only 14.1% covered three or more topics. The videos scored 22.4 ± 6.4 for reliability and 17.4 ± 6.2 for treatment options. Upon evaluation, the understandability and actionability of these videos were found to be 79.1% and 60.4%, respectively. Conclusion: TikTok holds significant potential for disseminating health information, primarily through content created by medical professionals. Currently, much of the content focuses on the symptoms and management of dry eye, with limited discussion on its definition, classification, and diagnosis. While most video content is reliable, there is a risk of incomplete or inaccurate information, these videos can serve as a reference. Therefore, the public should exercise caution when seeking information on dry eye through TikTok and individuals experiencing symptoms are advised to consult healthcare professionals for accurate diagnosis and treatment.
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.