ArticleMedicine2026
Reliability and quality of cognitive impairment educational content on Douyin and Bilibili: A cross-sectional content analysis.
Article in Medicine, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to evaluate the content characteristics, quality, and reliability of cognitive impairment educational videos on Douyin and Bilibili and examine whether video duration and user engagement are associated with information quality. This cross-sectional content analysis searched the Chinese domestic version of TikTok (Douyin; https://www.douyin.com/) and Bilibili (https://www.bilibili.com/) through their official web interfaces on March 12, 2026. Searches were performed in logged-out mode using the keyword "cognitive impairment" via a desktop browser. The first 150 results from each platform were screened, and 250 eligible videos were included (133 from Douyin and 117 from Bilibili). Video quality and reliability were evaluated with the Global Quality Score, modified DISCERN, Journal of the American Medical Association benchmark criteria, and Video Information and Quality Index. Overall educational quality was moderate. Across both platforms, content focused primarily on clinical manifestations and treatment, whereas epidemiology, diagnosis, and prognosis were insufficiently covered. Douyin videos had significantly higher Global Quality Score, modified DISCERN, Journal of the American Medical Association, and Video Information and Quality Index scores than Bilibili videos (all P < .001), despite being substantially shorter. Videos uploaded by doctors or other health professionals showed the highest quality and reliability, whereas videos uploaded by individual users generated stronger engagement. Correlations between engagement indicators and quality scores were weak, indicating that popularity did not reliably reflect educational value. Cognitive impairment videos on Douyin and Bilibili showed substantial variability in quality and incomplete content coverage. Professional participation, clearer source disclosure, and platform-level governance may improve the accuracy and practical utility of short-video health education on cognitive impairment.
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.