ArticleDigital health
Quality and reliability of glaucoma-related online Chinese videos on Douyin and Bilibili: Cross-sectional content analysis study.
Article in Digital health. 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Glaucoma is a leading cause of irreversible blindness, with a rising global prevalence, driving an increased public search for health information online. Online video platforms, such as Douyin and Bilibili, have become key channels for health communication. However, the quality and reliability of glaucoma-related content on these platforms remain unclear, raising concerns regarding potential misinformation. Methods: On 22 October 2025, the top 100 Chinese-language videos of glaucoma from Douyin and Bilibili were systematically collected. The video metadata and engagement metrics were recorded. Quality and reliability were assessed using the Global Quality Score (GQS), modified Decision-making Information Support Criteria for Evaluating the Reliability of Nonrandomized Studies (mDISCERN), JAMA (Journal of the American Medical Association) benchmark criteria, and Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT) for Audio Visual Content. Statistical analysis including Spearman correlation was used to examine the relationships between video variables and quality scores. Results: Douyin videos exhibited significantly higher user interaction (likes, comments, shares, and saves) than Bilibili videos. However, the Bilibili videos demonstrated significantly higher median scores for GQS and PEMAT actionability. Videos from professional sources, particularly institutions, and those focusing on disease prevention or using expert monologue/visual aids consistently showed superior quality and reliability across all the assessment tools. Spearman correlation revealed that longer video duration was positively correlated with higher GQS, mDISCERN, and PEMAT understandability scores, whereas fewer comments were negatively correlated with these scores. Conclusions: The overall quality and reliability of glaucoma-related online videos from Douyin and Bilibili were suboptimal. Content from nonprofessional sources was problematic. These findings highlight the need for public vigilance when consuming health information on such platforms, and underscore the importance of encouraging greater involvement from healthcare professionals in creating accurate, high-quality educational content.
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.