Cargando…

TikTok as an Information Hodgepodge: Evaluation of the Quality and Reliability of Genitourinary Cancers Related Content

BACKGROUND: TikTok is the world’s fastest-growing video application, with 1.6 billion users in 2021. More and more patients are searching for information on genitourinary cancers via TikTok. We aim to evaluate the functional quality and reliability of genitourinary cancer-related videos on it and sh...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Xue, Xiaoqiang, Yang, Xinyi, Xu, Weifeng, Liu, Guanghua, Xie, Yi, Ji, Zhigang
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8885733/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35242704
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2022.789956
_version_ 1784660505769541632
author Xue, Xiaoqiang
Yang, Xinyi
Xu, Weifeng
Liu, Guanghua
Xie, Yi
Ji, Zhigang
author_facet Xue, Xiaoqiang
Yang, Xinyi
Xu, Weifeng
Liu, Guanghua
Xie, Yi
Ji, Zhigang
author_sort Xue, Xiaoqiang
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: TikTok is the world’s fastest-growing video application, with 1.6 billion users in 2021. More and more patients are searching for information on genitourinary cancers via TikTok. We aim to evaluate the functional quality and reliability of genitourinary cancer-related videos on it and share our thoughts based on the results for better public health promotion. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrieved 167 videos on bladder, prostate, and kidney cancer from TikTok. Only 61 videos (36.53%) met the inclusion criteria and were eventually regarded as sample videos. Each video’s length and descriptions, hashtags, number of views/likes/comments, forms of expression, and the uploader’s profile were included. Three validated assessment instruments: the Hexagonal Radar Schema, the Health on the Net Code scale, and the DISCERN instrument, were used for evaluating the quality and reliability of the information. All misinformation was counted and categorized. Univariate analysis of variance was performed for analyzing the results. The Post-Hoc least significant difference test was conducted to explore further explanation. RESULTS: Amongst 61 sample videos, healthcare practitioners contributed the most content (n = 29, 47.54%). However, 22 posts (36.07%) were misinformative, and the most common type was using outdated data. More than half of the videos could provide good (> 1 point) content on the diseases’ symptoms and examinations. However, the definition and outcomes were less addressed (tied at 21%). The HONcode scale and the DISCERN instrument revealed a consistent conclusion that most videos (n = 59, 96.72%) on TikTok were of poor to mediocre quality. Videos published by media agencies were statistically better in terms of reliability and overall score (P = 0.003 and 0.008, respectively). Fifty-three videos (86.89%) had at least two unexplained medical terms. Healthcare professionals tend to use professional terms most (mean = 5.28 words). CONCLUSIONS: Most videos on genitourinary cancers on TikTok are of poor to medium quality and reliability. However, videos posted by media agencies enjoyed great public attention and interaction. Medical practitioners could improve the video quality by cooperating with media agencies and avoiding unexplained terminologies.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8885733
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-88857332022-03-02 TikTok as an Information Hodgepodge: Evaluation of the Quality and Reliability of Genitourinary Cancers Related Content Xue, Xiaoqiang Yang, Xinyi Xu, Weifeng Liu, Guanghua Xie, Yi Ji, Zhigang Front Oncol Oncology BACKGROUND: TikTok is the world’s fastest-growing video application, with 1.6 billion users in 2021. More and more patients are searching for information on genitourinary cancers via TikTok. We aim to evaluate the functional quality and reliability of genitourinary cancer-related videos on it and share our thoughts based on the results for better public health promotion. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrieved 167 videos on bladder, prostate, and kidney cancer from TikTok. Only 61 videos (36.53%) met the inclusion criteria and were eventually regarded as sample videos. Each video’s length and descriptions, hashtags, number of views/likes/comments, forms of expression, and the uploader’s profile were included. Three validated assessment instruments: the Hexagonal Radar Schema, the Health on the Net Code scale, and the DISCERN instrument, were used for evaluating the quality and reliability of the information. All misinformation was counted and categorized. Univariate analysis of variance was performed for analyzing the results. The Post-Hoc least significant difference test was conducted to explore further explanation. RESULTS: Amongst 61 sample videos, healthcare practitioners contributed the most content (n = 29, 47.54%). However, 22 posts (36.07%) were misinformative, and the most common type was using outdated data. More than half of the videos could provide good (> 1 point) content on the diseases’ symptoms and examinations. However, the definition and outcomes were less addressed (tied at 21%). The HONcode scale and the DISCERN instrument revealed a consistent conclusion that most videos (n = 59, 96.72%) on TikTok were of poor to mediocre quality. Videos published by media agencies were statistically better in terms of reliability and overall score (P = 0.003 and 0.008, respectively). Fifty-three videos (86.89%) had at least two unexplained medical terms. Healthcare professionals tend to use professional terms most (mean = 5.28 words). CONCLUSIONS: Most videos on genitourinary cancers on TikTok are of poor to medium quality and reliability. However, videos posted by media agencies enjoyed great public attention and interaction. Medical practitioners could improve the video quality by cooperating with media agencies and avoiding unexplained terminologies. Frontiers Media S.A. 2022-02-15 /pmc/articles/PMC8885733/ /pubmed/35242704 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2022.789956 Text en Copyright © 2022 Xue, Yang, Xu, Liu, Xie and Ji https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Oncology
Xue, Xiaoqiang
Yang, Xinyi
Xu, Weifeng
Liu, Guanghua
Xie, Yi
Ji, Zhigang
TikTok as an Information Hodgepodge: Evaluation of the Quality and Reliability of Genitourinary Cancers Related Content
title TikTok as an Information Hodgepodge: Evaluation of the Quality and Reliability of Genitourinary Cancers Related Content
title_full TikTok as an Information Hodgepodge: Evaluation of the Quality and Reliability of Genitourinary Cancers Related Content
title_fullStr TikTok as an Information Hodgepodge: Evaluation of the Quality and Reliability of Genitourinary Cancers Related Content
title_full_unstemmed TikTok as an Information Hodgepodge: Evaluation of the Quality and Reliability of Genitourinary Cancers Related Content
title_short TikTok as an Information Hodgepodge: Evaluation of the Quality and Reliability of Genitourinary Cancers Related Content
title_sort tiktok as an information hodgepodge: evaluation of the quality and reliability of genitourinary cancers related content
topic Oncology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8885733/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35242704
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2022.789956
work_keys_str_mv AT xuexiaoqiang tiktokasaninformationhodgepodgeevaluationofthequalityandreliabilityofgenitourinarycancersrelatedcontent
AT yangxinyi tiktokasaninformationhodgepodgeevaluationofthequalityandreliabilityofgenitourinarycancersrelatedcontent
AT xuweifeng tiktokasaninformationhodgepodgeevaluationofthequalityandreliabilityofgenitourinarycancersrelatedcontent
AT liuguanghua tiktokasaninformationhodgepodgeevaluationofthequalityandreliabilityofgenitourinarycancersrelatedcontent
AT xieyi tiktokasaninformationhodgepodgeevaluationofthequalityandreliabilityofgenitourinarycancersrelatedcontent
AT jizhigang tiktokasaninformationhodgepodgeevaluationofthequalityandreliabilityofgenitourinarycancersrelatedcontent