ArticleFrontiers in digital health2026
Evaluating the accuracy, quality, and reliability of septoplasty-related content on TikTok.
Article in Frontiers in digital health, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: TikTok has become a major source of health information, but concerns remain regarding the quality and reliability of medical content. Septoplasty is one of the most performed otolaryngologic procedures and is frequently discussed on the platform. We seek to evaluate the quality, reliability, and accuracy of septoplasty-related content on TikTok. Methods: A cross-sectional content analysis of publicly available TikTok videos was conducted between April and May 2025. Videos were identified using the search terms "septoplasty," "deviated septum," and "septal reconstruction." After screening, 173 videos were included for analysis using the Global Quality Scale (GQS) and modified DISCERN (mDISCERN); 74 videos contained sufficient health information for evaluation with the Accuracy in Digital-health Instrument (ANDI). Descriptive and comparative analyses assessed content quality, reliability, accuracy, and engagement across creator types. Results: Overall, videos demonstrated moderate accuracy (mean ANDI 2.82), low-to-moderate quality (mean GQS 2.31), and low reliability (mean mDISCERN 0.78). Most videos (67.1%) were created by non-health care professionals. Physician-created videos had significantly higher accuracy, quality, and reliability scores than nonphysician videos (all Conclusion: Septoplasty-related TikTok content demonstrates moderate accuracy but generally low reliability and quality. Content created by physicians and other healthcare professionals demonstrated higher accuracy, quality, and reliability than content created by non-healthcare professionals. These findings support greater participation by qualified healthcare professionals in disseminating evidence-based information on social media, although the effects of such content on viewer understanding and healthcare decision-making were not assessed.
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.