ArticleScientific reports2026
The quality and reliability of short videos about depression on TikTok (Douyin): a cross-sectional study.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Depression is one of the most prevalent mental health disorders worldwide. Despite its significant impact on patients’ well-being, its etiology remains unclear, and diagnosis is often challenging. Currently, effective depression management requires long-term patient engagement, which includes consistent self-care, adherence to treatment plans, and ongoing mental health literacy. However, the quality of depression-related videos on short-video platforms varies widely, and some may contain misinformation that patients struggle to identify. This study aims to assess the information quality of depression-related short videos on TikTok (Douyin), the largest short-video platform in China. Based on the composite ranking, the top 200 depression-related videos on TikTok (Douyin) were rigorously screened by two independent psychiatrists according to predefined inclusion/exclusion criteria. Videos were categorized by publisher type, and detailed engagement metrics (likes, shares, comments, favorites) were recorded. Video quality was assessed using the Global Quality Scale (GQS), JAMA Benchmark Criteria, and the modified DISCERN tool (mDISCERN). Content analysis covered six key domains: definition, symptoms, risk factors, diagnosis, treatment, and outcomes. Finally, correlation analysis was conducted to evaluate the relationship between video quality and engagement metrics. The study ultimately included 121 depression-related videos, the majority of which (62%) were published by healthcare professionals, including psychiatrists (39.7%) and psychologists (13.2%). Overall, video quality was low, with median scores of 2 (IQR: 1–3) for both GQS and JAMA, and 0 (IQR: 0–1) for mDISCERN. In contrast, videos authored by psychiatrists provided more comprehensive coverage of depression-related content and demonstrated superior reliability and quality, with median scores of 3 (IQR: 2–3) for DISCERN, 2.5 (IQR: 2–3) for GQS, and 1 (IQR: 1–2) for JAMA. Notably, psychiatrist-produced videos also achieved higher public engagement metrics. Correlation analysis revealed a significant positive association between video quality scores and public engagement. Overall, the quality of depression-related video content on TikTok (Douyin) remains suboptimal and requires significant improvement. There is a pressing need for more high-quality, evidence-based depression-related videos to facilitate long-term and effective self-management among individuals with depression. Simultaneously, such efforts would help improve public awareness and accurate understanding of depression.
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.