TikTok misinformation and user engagement in female pelvic floor conditions.

IF 1.9 3区 医学 Q3 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY Neurourology and Urodynamics Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2024-06-03 DOI:10.1002/nau.25519
Alicia P Stephan, Sacha C Hauc, Victoria A Marks, Richard Bercik, Leslie Rickey
{"title":"TikTok misinformation and user engagement in female pelvic floor conditions.","authors":"Alicia P Stephan, Sacha C Hauc, Victoria A Marks, Richard Bercik, Leslie Rickey","doi":"10.1002/nau.25519","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Importance: </strong>Social media platforms are increasingly utilized to distribute medical information. Our study emphasizes the need for accuracy in pelvic health education on social media and the involvement of female pelvic floor (FPF) specialists in content creation.</p><p><strong>Aims: </strong>In this cross-sectional study, we assessed the FPF TikTok videos with the highest engagement for quality of information and misinformation and investigated the relationship between misinformation and user engagement.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We collected all TikTok videos on the US app with hashtags related to FPF conditions, including 76 on pelvic organ prolapse, 323 on urinary tract infection, 84 on overactive bladder, and 972 on incontinence. The top 20 videos for each FPF condition were selected based on highest engagement, and 74 videos total met inclusion criteria. TikTok videos were scored with the validated DISCERN instrument for quality of consumer health information and a 5-point Likert scale for misinformation. The correlation between misinformation and user engagement was assessed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our analysis revealed positive correlations among higher average misinformation scores and shares (r = 0.37, p < 0.001), likes (r = 0.23, p = 0.004), and overall engagement (r = 0.25, p = 0.002) in FPF TikTok videos as a group, likely driven by the #UTI category. Most TikTok videos (96%) had poor quality of information (DISCERN score < 3), and 18% of TikTok videos contained misinformation.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The poor quality and prevalence of misinformation in FPF-related TikTok videos with the highest engagement raise concerns about the propagation of nonevidence-based health information.</p>","PeriodicalId":19200,"journal":{"name":"Neurourology and Urodynamics","volume":" ","pages":"1956-1961"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11496003/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurourology and Urodynamics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/nau.25519","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/3 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Importance: Social media platforms are increasingly utilized to distribute medical information. Our study emphasizes the need for accuracy in pelvic health education on social media and the involvement of female pelvic floor (FPF) specialists in content creation.

Aims: In this cross-sectional study, we assessed the FPF TikTok videos with the highest engagement for quality of information and misinformation and investigated the relationship between misinformation and user engagement.

Methods: We collected all TikTok videos on the US app with hashtags related to FPF conditions, including 76 on pelvic organ prolapse, 323 on urinary tract infection, 84 on overactive bladder, and 972 on incontinence. The top 20 videos for each FPF condition were selected based on highest engagement, and 74 videos total met inclusion criteria. TikTok videos were scored with the validated DISCERN instrument for quality of consumer health information and a 5-point Likert scale for misinformation. The correlation between misinformation and user engagement was assessed.

Results: Our analysis revealed positive correlations among higher average misinformation scores and shares (r = 0.37, p < 0.001), likes (r = 0.23, p = 0.004), and overall engagement (r = 0.25, p = 0.002) in FPF TikTok videos as a group, likely driven by the #UTI category. Most TikTok videos (96%) had poor quality of information (DISCERN score < 3), and 18% of TikTok videos contained misinformation.

Conclusion: The poor quality and prevalence of misinformation in FPF-related TikTok videos with the highest engagement raise concerns about the propagation of nonevidence-based health information.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
TikTok 在女性盆底疾病方面的错误信息和用户参与。
重要性社交媒体平台越来越多地被用于发布医疗信息。我们的研究强调了社交媒体上盆腔健康教育的准确性以及女性盆底(FPF)专家参与内容创作的必要性。目的:在这项横断面研究中,我们评估了参与度最高的 FPF TikTok 视频的信息质量和错误信息,并调查了错误信息与用户参与度之间的关系:我们收集了美国应用程序上所有带有与 FPF 病症相关的标签的 TikTok 视频,其中包括 76 个关于盆腔器官脱垂的视频、323 个关于尿路感染的视频、84 个关于膀胱过度活动症的视频和 972 个关于尿失禁的视频。每个 FPF 病症的前 20 个视频是根据最高参与度选出的,共有 74 个视频符合纳入标准。TikTok 视频采用经过验证的 DISCERN 工具对消费者健康信息的质量进行评分,并采用 5 分制李克特量表对错误信息进行评分。评估了错误信息与用户参与度之间的相关性:我们的分析表明,错误信息平均得分越高,分享次数越多,两者之间存在正相关关系(r = 0.37,p 结论:错误信息的质量差和普遍性与用户参与度之间存在正相关关系:在参与度最高的与 FPF 相关的 TikTok 视频中,错误信息的质量差且普遍存在,这引起了人们对非基于证据的健康信息传播的担忧。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Neurourology and Urodynamics
Neurourology and Urodynamics 医学-泌尿学与肾脏学
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
10.00%
发文量
231
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Neurourology and Urodynamics welcomes original scientific contributions from all parts of the world on topics related to urinary tract function, urinary and fecal continence and pelvic floor function.
期刊最新文献
Interstitial Cystitis/Bladder Pain Syndrome Patient Phenotyping. Role of Gynecologic Findings in Interstitial Cystitis/Bladder Pain Syndrome: A Consensus. A Review of the Etiopathology of Phenotypes in Interstitial Cystitis/Bladder Pain Syndrome. Interstitial Cystitis/Bladder Pain Syndrome in Men. Interstitial Cystitis/Bladder Pain Syndrome: Why a Global Patient Registry Is Critically Needed.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1