Assessing the quality of breast cancer-related videos on TikTok: A cross-sectional study.

IF 2.9 3区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES DIGITAL HEALTH Pub Date : 2024-08-30 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1177/20552076241277688
Yang Qu, Jie Lian, Bo Pan, Jiahui Zhang, Yidong Zhou
{"title":"Assessing the quality of breast cancer-related videos on TikTok: A cross-sectional study.","authors":"Yang Qu, Jie Lian, Bo Pan, Jiahui Zhang, Yidong Zhou","doi":"10.1177/20552076241277688","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Breast cancer, the most common cancer in women globally, highlights the need for patient education. Despite many breast cancer discussions on TikTok, their scientific evaluation is lacking. Our study seeks to assess the content quality and accuracy of popular TikTok videos on breast cancer, to improve the dissemination of health knowledge.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>On August 22, 2023, we collected the top 100 trending videos from TikTok's Chinese version using \"breast cancer/breast nodule\" as keywords. We noted their length, TikTok duration, likes, comments, favorites, reposts, uploader types, and topics. Four assessment tools were used: Goobie's six questions, the Patient Educational Material Assessment Tool (PEMAT), the Video Information and Quality Index (VIQI), and the Global Quality Score (GQS). These instruments evaluate videos based on content, informational integrity, and overall quality.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among the 100 videos, content quality was low with Goobie's questions mostly scoring 0, except for management at 1.0 (QR 1.0). PEMAT scores were moderate: 54.1 (QR 1.6) for sum, 47.0 (QR 18.8) for PEMAT-A, and 52.3 (QR 11.7) for PEMAT-U. Regarding the quality of information, the VIQI (sum) median was 14.1 (QR 0.2). Additionally, the median GQS score was 3.5 (QR 0.1). Medical professionals' videos focused on breast cancer stages, while patient videos centered on personal experiences. Patient videos had lower content and overall quality compared to those by medical professionals (PEMAT, GQS: <i>P</i> < 0.001, <i>P</i> = 0.004) but received more comments, indicating higher engagement (all <i>P</i> < 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>TikTok's breast cancer content shows educational potential, but while informational quality is moderate, content quality needs improvement. Videos by medical professionals are of higher quality. We recommend increased involvement of healthcare professionals on TikTok to enhance content quality. Non-medical users should share verified information, and TikTok should strengthen its content vetting. Users must scrutinize the credibility of health information on social platforms.</p>","PeriodicalId":51333,"journal":{"name":"DIGITAL HEALTH","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11367700/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"DIGITAL HEALTH","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20552076241277688","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Breast cancer, the most common cancer in women globally, highlights the need for patient education. Despite many breast cancer discussions on TikTok, their scientific evaluation is lacking. Our study seeks to assess the content quality and accuracy of popular TikTok videos on breast cancer, to improve the dissemination of health knowledge.

Methods: On August 22, 2023, we collected the top 100 trending videos from TikTok's Chinese version using "breast cancer/breast nodule" as keywords. We noted their length, TikTok duration, likes, comments, favorites, reposts, uploader types, and topics. Four assessment tools were used: Goobie's six questions, the Patient Educational Material Assessment Tool (PEMAT), the Video Information and Quality Index (VIQI), and the Global Quality Score (GQS). These instruments evaluate videos based on content, informational integrity, and overall quality.

Results: Among the 100 videos, content quality was low with Goobie's questions mostly scoring 0, except for management at 1.0 (QR 1.0). PEMAT scores were moderate: 54.1 (QR 1.6) for sum, 47.0 (QR 18.8) for PEMAT-A, and 52.3 (QR 11.7) for PEMAT-U. Regarding the quality of information, the VIQI (sum) median was 14.1 (QR 0.2). Additionally, the median GQS score was 3.5 (QR 0.1). Medical professionals' videos focused on breast cancer stages, while patient videos centered on personal experiences. Patient videos had lower content and overall quality compared to those by medical professionals (PEMAT, GQS: P < 0.001, P = 0.004) but received more comments, indicating higher engagement (all P < 0.05).

Conclusion: TikTok's breast cancer content shows educational potential, but while informational quality is moderate, content quality needs improvement. Videos by medical professionals are of higher quality. We recommend increased involvement of healthcare professionals on TikTok to enhance content quality. Non-medical users should share verified information, and TikTok should strengthen its content vetting. Users must scrutinize the credibility of health information on social platforms.

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
评估 TikTok 上乳腺癌相关视频的质量:横断面研究
目的:乳腺癌是全球女性中最常见的癌症,这凸显了患者教育的必要性。尽管在 TikTok 上有许多关于乳腺癌的讨论,但却缺乏对它们的科学评估。我们的研究旨在评估 TikTok 上关于乳腺癌的热门视频的内容质量和准确性,以改善健康知识的传播:方法:2023 年 8 月 22 日,我们以 "乳腺癌/乳腺结节 "为关键词,收集了 TikTok 中文版排名前 100 的热门视频。我们记录了这些视频的长度、TikTok 时长、点赞数、评论数、收藏数、转帖数、上传者类型和主题。我们使用了四种评估工具:Goobie 的六个问题、患者教育材料评估工具 (PEMAT)、视频信息和质量指数 (VIQI) 以及全球质量评分 (GQS)。这些工具根据内容、信息完整性和整体质量对视频进行评估:在 100 部视频中,内容质量较低,Goobie 的问题大多为 0 分,只有管理问题为 1.0 分(QR 1.0)。PEMAT 分数中等:总和为 54.1 (QR 1.6),PEMAT-A 为 47.0 (QR 18.8),PEMAT-U 为 52.3 (QR 11.7)。在信息质量方面,VIQI(总和)的中位数为 14.1(前值 0.2)。此外,GQS 的中位数为 3.5(QR 0.1)。医务人员的视频侧重于乳腺癌的各个阶段,而患者的视频则以个人经历为中心。与医务人员的视频相比,患者视频的内容和整体质量较低(PEMAT、GQS:P P = 0.004),但收到的评论较多,表明参与度较高(均为 P 结论):TikTok 的乳腺癌内容具有教育潜力,但信息质量适中,内容质量有待提高。医疗专业人员制作的视频质量更高。我们建议增加医疗保健专业人员在 TikTok 上的参与度,以提高内容质量。非医疗用户应分享经过验证的信息,TikTok 应加强内容审核。用户必须仔细审查社交平台上健康信息的可信度。
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
DIGITAL HEALTH
DIGITAL HEALTH Multiple-
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
7.70%
发文量
302
期刊最新文献
A feasibility study on utilizing machine learning technology to reduce the costs of gastric cancer screening in Taizhou, China. Ageing well with tech: Exploring the determinants of e-healthcare services adoption in an emerging economy. Chinese colposcopists' attitudes toward the colposcopic artificial intelligence auxiliary diagnostic system (CAIADS): A nation-wide, multi-center survey. Digital leadership: Norwegian healthcare managers' attitudes towards using digital tools. Disease characteristics influence the privacy calculus to adopt electronic health records: A survey study in Germany.
×
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:481959085
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