ArticleJMIR formative research2025
Quality and Dissemination of Uterine Fibroid Health Information on TikTok and Bilibili: Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in JMIR formative research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 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
24 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluating the quality and reliability of rotator cuff injury related videos on Bilibili and TikTok: A cross-sectional analysis.Medicine · 2026Article
- Article
- Article
- Quality and reliability of information about blood glucose monitoring on TikTok and Bilibili: A cross-sectional analysis.PLOS digital health · 2026Article
- Health-Related Quality of Life in Women with Uterine Fibroids Recruited from Clinical and Online Settings: A Cross-Sectional Comparative Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Bilibili and TikTok heart failure short video evaluation: a cross-sectional study.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Videos on Bilibili, TikTok, and Xiaohongshu as Sources of Medical Information on Adenoid Hypertrophy: Cross-Sectional Content Analysis.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- Quality, content structure, and reliability of prostatitis-related information on short-video platforms: a cross-platform analysis of TikTok and Bilibili.BMC urology · 2026Article
- A cross sectional content analysis evaluates chemotherapy health information quality and reliability on TikTok and Bilibili.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Article
- Quality and dissemination of nasopharyngeal cancer health information on TikTok and Bilibili: Cross-sectional study.Medicine · 2026Article
- Article
- Evaluation of short video quality and reliability of non-invasive prenatal testing on TikTok and Bilibili platforms: a cross-sectional study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2026Article
- A cross-sectional analysis of the quality and characteristics of sleep apnea hypopnea syndrome videos on YouTube, Bilibili, and TikTok.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Quality and reliability of myelodysplastic syndromes-related health information on Chinese short-video platforms: a multi-platform cross-sectional analysis.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
- The reliability and quality of short videos as a source of dietary guidance for cardiovascular disease: a cross-sectional study.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Article
- Quality and Reliability of Social Media Videos on Weight-Loss Interventions for Obstructive Sleep Apnea: A Multi-Platform Cross-Sectional Study.Nature and science of sleep · 2026Article
- Evaluating the quality and reliability of cervical cancer related videos on YouTube, Bilibili, and Tiktok: a cross-sectional analysis.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Socioeconomic stratification in adolescent digital engagement: cultural capital, emotional mediation, and bilibili usage patterns in Chinese high schools.Frontiers in sociology · 2025Article
- Quality and reliability of Chinese short videos on TikTok related to chronic renal failure: cross-sectional study.Frontiers in public health · 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: The rise of short-video platforms, such as TikTok (Douyin in China) and Bilibili, has significantly influenced how health information is disseminated to the public. However, the quality, reliability, and effectiveness of health-related content on these platforms, particularly regarding uterine fibroids, remain underexplored. Uterine fibroids are a common medical condition that affects a substantial proportion of women worldwide. While these platforms have become vital sources of health education, misinformation and incomplete content may undermine their efficacy. Objective: This study aims to address these gaps by evaluating the quality and dissemination effectiveness of uterine fibroid-related health information on TikTok and Bilibili. Methods: A total of 200 uterine fibroid-related videos (100 from TikTok and 100 from Bilibili) were selected through a keyword search. The videos were evaluated by 2 trained gynecological experts using the Global Quality Score (GQS) and a modified DISCERN (mDISCERN) tool. In addition, the Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool for Audio and Visual Materials was used to assess the understandability and actionability of the videos. Statistical analyses, including the Mann-Whitney U test, Spearman rank correlation, and stepwise regression analysis, were used to assess differences between platforms and identify predictors of video quality. Results: The results indicated that TikTok outperformed Bilibili in terms of user engagement metrics, such as likes, comments, shares, and followers (all P<.001). However, Bilibili videos were generally longer than those on TikTok (P<.001). The videos on both platforms demonstrated suboptimal overall quality and reliability, reflected by median GQS score of 3 (IQR 3-4) for TikTok and the median GQS score of Bilibili is 3 (IQR 2-4). The median modified DISCERN scores were also low: 2 (IQR 2-2) for TikTok and 2 (IQR 2-2) for Bilibili, with no significant differences between the 2 platforms (P=.62 for GQS; P=.18 for mDISCERN). The videos on both platforms yielded comparable median scores for Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool-Understandability (PEMAT-U) and Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool-Actionability (PEMAT-A). The median score of PEMAT-U was 77% (IQR 69%-83%) for TikTok and 77% (IQR 69%-85%) for Bilibili. The PEMAT-A yielded a median score of 67% (IQR 33%-67%) for TikTok and 67% (IQR 0-67%) for Bilibili. Videos uploaded by medical professionals on TikTok had significantly higher quality scores compared to those uploaded by nonprofessionals. A moderate positive correlation was observed between the GQS and mDISCERN scores (r=0.41, P<.01), indicating an interrelationship between quality and reliability. Stepwise regression analysis identified "completeness score," "source," and "PEMAT scores" as significant predictors of video quality. Conclusions: This study highlights the generally low quality of uterine fibroid-related health information on short-video platforms, although TikTok showed better performance in terms of engagement and quality. The involvement of medical professionals was found to enhance video quality. These findings underscore the need for improved oversight of health content on social media platforms and greater involvement of health care professionals to ensure the dissemination of accurate and reliable 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.