ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2026
Evaluation of short video quality and reliability of non-invasive prenatal testing on TikTok and Bilibili platforms: a cross-sectional study.
Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundNon-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) is a genetic test to screen fetal chromosomal abnormalities in pregnancy. Public reliance on short-video platforms for health information in China is increasing, yet the quality of such online content remains unassessed. This study aimed to evaluate the quality and reliability of videos related to NIPT on major Chinese social media platforms.
methodsA cross-sectional study was conducted to analyze short videos related to NIPT on TikTok and Bilibili. Data of video duration, video source and user interaction metrics were collected for statistical analysis. Video quality assessment tools, such as the Global Quality Score (GQS), modified DISCERN, Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmark criteria and the Video Information and Quality Index (VIQI) were used for evaluation and comparison. Statistical analyses included descriptive analysis, non-parametric tests and the Spearman correlation analysis.
resultsA total of 180 videos (80 from Bilibili, 100 from TikTok) were analyzed. Bilibili videos were significantly longer and scored higher in median GQS (3.00 vs. 2.50), mDISCERN (3.00 vs. 2.00), and VIQI (12.00 vs. 8.00) compared to TikTok (all P < 0.05), though JAMA benchmark criteria were similar. TikTok videos generated substantially higher user engagement (likes, collections, shares, comments). Videos uploaded by medical professionals received higher engagement and quality scores than those from institutions or individual users. Correlation analyses revealed weak or inconsistent associations between user engagement metrics and video quality scores on both platforms, indicating that popular content was not reliably accurate.
conclusionThe quality and reliability of short videos about NIPT on these platforms need to be improved. Platform regulators should also strengthen the supervision of the quality of short videos.
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.