ArticleDigital health
Quality and reliability of video based information on intracerebral hemorrhage on TikTok and Bilibili: A cross sectional 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) is the most devastating stroke subtype, characterized by high mortality and disability rates. With the rapid growth of short-video platforms, TikTok and BiliBili have become important channels for the public to obtain health information. However, the quality and reliability of ICH-related videos on these platforms have not been systematically evaluated. Methods: Up to October 17-18, 2025, the research collected the top 100 comprehensively ranked videos from TikTok and BiliBili separately, using the Chinese term " (ICH)" as the search keyword. After screening, 146 videos were included. Two independent reviewers assessed video quality and reliability using three standardized tools: the Global Quality Scale (GQS), the modified DISCERN (mDISCERN) instrument, and the JAMA benchmark. Correlation analysis was used to evaluate the relationship between video quality and engagement metrics. Results: Videos on BiliBili scored significantly higher than those on TikTok on both the GQS and mDISCERN (P < 0.001 and P = 0.039, respectively). Furthermore, BiliBili outperformed TikTok in terms of content completeness. However, TikTok demonstrated significantly higher engagement metrics (likes, favorites, comments, and shares) than BiliBili (P < 0.01 for all). Videos uploaded by healthcare professionals achieved the highest quality, with a median GQS score of 3 (IQR 2-4). Correlation analysis revealed a positive correlation between video length and quality scores, while the number of comments was negatively correlated with both video quality and length. Conclusion: The quality and reliability of ICH-related videos were superior on BiliBili compared to TikTok, whereas TikTok exhibited overwhelming advantages in user engagement. Longer video duration was associated with better quality and reliability. Although videos from healthcare professionals scored higher in quality and reliability than those from individual users, they still did not meet the standard for high-quality information. This indicates the ongoing challenge of effectively translating specialized medical knowledge into reliable, practical, and easily understandable information for the public.
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.