ReviewJournal of clinical and experimental dentistry2025
TikTok as a Source of Information on Temporomandibular Disorders: Reliable Health Education or Misinformation?
Review in Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Temporomandibular disorders (TMD) are prevalent musculoskeletal conditions affecting the orofacial region, often requiring interdisciplinary management. Social media platforms, particularly TikTok, have become popular sources of health-related information. However, concerns persist regarding the reliability and educational value of user-generated content. Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the reliability and educational value of TikTok videos on TMD and compare content characteristics across three categories of creators: general users, dental care professionals, and other healthcare professionals. Material and Methods: A descriptive observational cross-sectional study was conducted, analyzing TikTok videos related to TMD using predefined inclusion criteria. A total of 98 videos were assessed based on three validated scoring systems: Video Content Score (VCS), Quality Criteria for Consumer Health Information (DISCERN), and Global Quality Score (GQS). Inter-rater reliability was established (Cohen's kappa 0.86). Statistical analyses, including the Kruskal-Walli's test and post-hoc Dunn's test, were performed to compare video characteristics and engagement metrics among content creator groups. It was also performed a quali-quantitative analysis of the scoring systems. Results: The analyzed TikTok videos on TMD showed low educational quality (VCS = 2.0, GQS = 2.0, median) and poor to fair reliability (DISCERN = 33.0), highlighting their limited and incomplete information. Although no statistically significant differences were found among content creator groups (VCS: p = 0.453; DISCERN: p = 0.239; GQS: p = 0.341), videos by healthcare professionals tended to have higher quality scores, presenting more structured content aligned with scientific guidelines on TMD. The analyzed TikTok videos on TMD exhibit critical deficiencies, including inadequate assessment, classification, and discussion of etiology and risk factors. Low VCS, DISCERN, and GQS scores highlight the lack of evidence-based content, poor reliability, and limited educational value, reinforcing concerns about misinformation. Conclusions: Despite TikTok's growing role in disseminating health-related information, the overall educational quality of TMD-related videos remains inadequate. While healthcare professionals tend to produce more structured content, the lack of significant differences across creator groups underscores a general deficiency in reliable, evidence-based information on the platform. These findings highlight the need for greater oversight, content validation, and expert-reviewed educational initiatives to improve the credibility of TMD-related information on social media.
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.