ArticleInternational urogynecology journal2026
Episiotomy on TikTok: Assessing Misinformation and Information Quality Shared on a Popular Social Media Platform.
Article in International urogynecology journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
introduction and hypothesisEpisiotomy is among the most performed obstetrical procedure globally. While restrictive episiotomy is recommended, patients may be reluctant to consent. TikTok, a rapidly growing video platform, is a popular patient resource to obtain health information on episiotomy. This study aimed to evaluate the information quality and degree of misinformation contained in TikTok videos about episiotomy and examine the relationship between user engagement and misinformation.
methodsIn this cross-sectional study, we identified the top videos with keyword "episiotomy" on the Canadian TikTok app. Three reviewers scored videos using the DISCERN instrument for health information quality and a 5-point Likert scale for misinformation. We evaluated correlation between user engagement and misinformation and narrator credentials and misinformation using the Pearson correlation coefficient.
resultsForty-seven videos met the inclusion criteria. The median video length was 57 s (IQR 15-89). Most videos were oriented towards education (59.6%) and narrated by healthcare providers (36.2%) or patients (25.5%). Many videos (71.74%) contained low quality information (DISCERN score < 3), and 36.17% of videos contained misinformation (misinformation rating Likert score > 3). There was no significant correlation between engagement and misinformation (r = 0.06, p = 0.68) nor between narrator credentials and misinformation (r = 0.17, p = 0.29).
conclusionsLow-quality health information and misinformation about episiotomy are prevalent on TikTok. Neither user engagement nor narrator credentials showed a significant correlation with misinformation. Patient education about potential misinformation on these platforms and development of evidence-based resources about episiotomy are essential to support informed decision-making.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41427989What 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.