Observational studyAesthetic plastic surgery2026
Scrolling for Surgery: Artificial Intelligence-Powered Evaluation of Labiaplasty Discourse on TikTok.
Observational study in Aesthetic plastic surgery, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLabiaplasty has experienced growing popularity, with over 10,800 procedures performed annually in the USA. Discussions about this surgery are shifting to social media, particularly TikTok, where health information is often presented with limited regulation or oversight. This raises concerns about the accuracy, quality, and influence of labiaplasty-related content.
methodsWe conducted a cross-sectional observational study analyzing the 110 most relevant TikTok videos under the term "labiaplasty" (July-August 2025). Video characteristics, engagement metrics (likes, shares, comments), and creator types were recorded. Content quality was assessed using the Global Quality Scale (GQS) by human reviewers and an AI model (ChatGPT-4.5-turbo). Sentiment analysis of video comments was performed by two human raters and the AI model. Statistical analyses included Wilcoxon signed-rank and Mann-Whitney U tests.
resultsSurgeons (52%) and patients (40%) produced most videos, primarily on educational (39%) or postoperative (28%) content. Overall, median human-rated GQS was 3.5 [IQR, 2.13-4.88], while the AI median was 3 [IQR, 2-4]. Videos with ≥2000 likes were more often created by patients (52% vs. 32%, p=0.012) and had significantly lower GQS scores (human: 2.5 vs. 4, p=0.003; AI: 2 vs. 3, p<0.001). Human inter-rater reliability for sentiment classification was slight (κ=0.161), with minimal agreement between AI and humans (κ=0.077).
conclusionLabiaplasty content on TikTok is predominantly generated by surgeons and patients, yet lower-quality videos achieve higher engagement. Surgeons should proactively create accurate, relatable content to counterbalance misinformation. Refinement of AI tools is needed for reliable quality and sentiment assessment on social media. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .
Indexed as
Identifiers
42277420What 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.