ArticleIrish journal of medical science2025
Recurrent aphthous stomatitis information on TikTok: satisfactory or substandard?
Article in Irish journal of medical science, 2025. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSocial media is increasingly utilised as a means of disseminating oral health information. Recurrent aphthous stomatitis (RAS) is the most common ulcerating condition of the oral mucosa.
aimThe aim of this study was to evaluate the quality of TikTok videos concerning RAS. MATERIAL AND
methodsTikTok searches were performed using the terms "canker sores/#cankersores" and "aphthous ulcers/#aphthousulcers" and arranged by popularity. Videos were analysed and categorised into healthcare professionals (HCPs), non-healthcare professionals (non-HCPs) and other. Video quality was assessed using the Global Quality Score (GQS), modifed DISCERN (mDISCERN) and Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT).
resultsEighty-three videos were analysed. Overall, the videos were of poor quality with mean GQS and mDISCERN scores of 2.21 and 1.74 respectively. PEMAT understandability and actionability scores averaged 76.43% and 68.47% respectively. Videos uploaded by HCPs were generally of higher quality than others; this difference was statistically significant (p < 0.001). Weak positive correlation was noted between video engagement and quality (p < 0.05).
conclusionThe quality of videos examined was generally poor. It is important that social media users exert caution when utilising TikTok as a means of educating themselves about oral health. Additionally, healthcare professionals must be aware of health misinformation on social media, as it may negatively influence patient outcomes.
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.