ArticleJournal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education2026
Quality Assessment of Chinese TikTok as a Source of Information About Esophageal Cancer.
Article in Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
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
Esophageal cancer is a prevalent cancer worldwide, with incidence rates rising significantly in recent years, particularly in high-risk regions where case numbers continue to escalate. As one of the most visited social media platforms globally, TikTok has emerged as a key source for health information. This study aims to evaluate Chinese TikTok videos on esophageal cancer, focusing on content integrity, informational quality, source credibility, usefulness, and reliability.: We assessed 246 esophageal cancer-related videos using the Content Integrity Score based on Goobie's coding scheme for content evaluation and the DISCERN instrument for assessing information reliability and treatment guidance. Videos were categorized by duration, source, publication year, and user engagement metrics (likes, comments, favorites, shares). Statistical analysis was conducted using Shapiro-Wilk, Kruskal-Wallis and post hoc Bonferroni tests. Additionally, Spearman's correlation analysis was applied to explore relationships between key quantitative variables. Of the videos analyzed, 212(86.2%) were uploaded by doctors, and 168(68.3%) lacked content related to risk factors. and 217(88.2%) had a quality score rated as poor or below. User engagement metrics, including likes, comments, saves, and shares, exhibited strong intercorrelations. However, only shares showed a weak correlation with DISCERN scores (R = 0.134, p = 0.036). Additionally, DISCERN scores were positively correlated with video duration (R = 0.352, p < 0.001). Chinese TikTok videos on esophageal cancer generally offer low-quality information that lacks accuracy and is insufficient for guiding patients in making informed health decisions. Given the low quality and reliability of such content, TikTok is not a suitable source for patient education.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40272765What 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.