ArticleAesthetic surgery journal. Open forum2026
Status of Medical Aesthetic Science Popularization Videos on Social Media in China: Characteristics and Quality Assessment.
Article in Aesthetic surgery journal. Open forum, 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
Background: Medical aesthetics science popularization videos have progressively emerged as a crucial channel of information for patients. Therefore, the significance of their scientific rigor and standardization has become increasingly pronounced. Nevertheless, there is a dearth of comprehensive quality evaluation for such videos in China. Objectives: This study evaluates the current state and quality of such videos on China's 3 major social media platforms. Methods: The top 200 videos for 6 key words on 3 major social media platforms were collected. Baseline characteristics and quality evaluation (Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool for Audio-Visual Materials [PEMAT-A/V] score and DISCERN questionnaire) of the videos were gathered. Analyses were conducted on the differences in video quality and baseline information among different social media and content categories. Then, subgroup analysis based on video sources and correlation analysis was performed. Results: A total of 2202 medical aesthetic science popularization videos from 3 major social media platforms (Bilibili, TikTok, and Rednote) and 6 topic terms (medical aesthetics, injectable aesthetics, blepharoplasty, rhinoplasty, fat grafting, and breast surgery) were incorporated into this study. The overall score of such videos was relatively low according to the PEMAT-A/V and DISCERN score. The overall quality of videos on TikTok was relatively higher, followed by that on Bilibili and then on Rednote. Videos related to eye blepharoplasty and rhinoplasty or uploaded by specialists had higher PEMAT-A/V and DISCERN scores. Conclusions: The overall quality of these videos in China is currently relatively low. In particular, videos on various platforms showed differences in both content and patterns, and videos, with content related to blepharoplasty and rhinoplasty and those produced by specialists exhibited relatively higher quality. This study elucidates the current state of such videos and further emphasizes the significance of improving the standardization and scientific rigor of medical aesthetics science popularization videos.
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.