ArticleBMC women's health2026
The quality and reliability of endometrial cancer-related videos on social short video platforms: a cross-sectional study.
Article in BMC women's health, 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundWith the increasing public awareness of health, TikTok and Bilibili have become the domain source of short-video platforms for health-related information. This study aims to investigate the quality and reliability of short videos about endometrial cancer on two platforms.
methodsThis cross-sectional study was conducted on TikTok and Bilibili to evaluate short videos related to endometrial cancer. The two platforms were searched using the term 'endometrial cancer' from 15:00 to 22:00 on 29 September 2025. The quality of related information was assessed by the Global Quality Score (GQS) and the modified DISCERN score (mDISCERN), and analyzed by descriptive statistics, inter-group comparison, and correlation analysis.
results200 initial endometrial cancer-related videos were searched, and finally, 174 videos were included from TikTok and Bilibili. The GQS and mDISCERN scores of both platforms were low (median 2/5), and the median(Q1-Q3) duration of these videos was 80 s (46.50-144.50), and the duration of Bilibili videos was longer (111 s to 63 s, P < 0.001). The engagement with TikTok videos was relatively high (median likes: 1342 to 6, P < 0.001). Expert-uploaded videos were longer than those from other origins (median 109 s) and of better quality (median mDISCERN 3/5, P < 0.001). The quality component was positively associated with the duration of short videos(r = 0.42-0.46). The five major dimensions of health demonstrated "fragmented content and insufficient depth": the highest coverage rate of symptoms was 36.2%, while the lowest coverage rate of prevention was 3.5%; the coverage rates of etiology, diagnosis, and therapy were all below 20%.
conclusionsSignificant quality gaps exist in endometrial cancer videos. To enhance the structure and completeness of health information, professional participation should be strengthened in the future.
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.