ReviewDigital health
Credibility of health-related content on Chinese short-video platforms: A scoping review on accuracy, risks, and quality metrics.
Review in Digital health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Quality assessment of dry eye educational videos on Xiaohongshu and differences by uploader type.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Evaluating the quality and reliability of radiation dermatitis related videos on Douyin and Bilibili: a cross-sectional analysis.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Short videos have emerged as a significant medium for disseminating health information. However, misleading content can lead to poor health decisions, undermining national efforts to enhance health knowledge and public health literacy. Objective: This study aims to systematically evaluate the quality and reliability of health-related videos on Chinese short-video platforms and to offer insights for the regulation of digital health on a global scale. Methods: A comprehensive search was conducted across the China Biology Medicine Database, PubMed, Wanfang, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and VIP databases for articles published between January 2021 and December 2024. Twenty-five articles meeting the inclusion criteria were included and analyzed to evaluate the quality and credibility of health-related short videos on Chinese platforms, as well as the correlation between the type of creator and video quality. Results: Health-related videos created by healthcare professionals or institutions demonstrated higher reliability and accuracy. The DISCERN was the most commonly used tool in the evaluation of these videos. Overall, video quality was generally substandard, with the prevalence of inaccurate information ranging from 10.1% to 100% across various health topics. Conclusions: This review identified substantial deficiencies in the accuracy of health information disseminated through Chinese short-video platforms. The presence of low-quality content has negative impact on public health decision-making. These findings align with evaluation of health-related videos on international platforms, such as YouTube and Instagram. Therefore, it is imperative to adopt comprehensive strategies, including content moderation, creator verification, and responsible algorithm management to improve video quality and ensure the public's access to reliable digital 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.