The Quality of Short Videos as a Source of Coronary Heart Disease Information on TikTok: Cross-Sectional Study
Xun Gong,Meijuan Chen,Lihong Ning,Lingzhong Zeng,Bo Dong
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2196/51513
2024-09-03
Abstract:Background: Coronary heart disease (CHD) is a leading cause of death worldwide and imposes a significant economic burden. TikTok has risen as a favored platform within the social media sphere for disseminating CHD-related information and stands as a pivotal resource for patients seeking knowledge about CHD. However, the quality of such content on TikTok remains largely unexplored. Objective: This study aims to assess the quality of information conveyed in TikTok CHD-related videos. Methods: A comprehensive cross-sectional study was undertaken on TikTok videos related to CHD. The sources of the videos were identified and analyzed. The comprehensiveness of content was assessed through 6 questions addressing the definition, signs and symptoms, risk factors, evaluation, management, and outcomes. The quality of the videos was assessed using 3 standardized evaluative instruments: DISCERN, the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmarks, and the Global Quality Scale (GQS). Furthermore, correlative analyses between video quality and characteristics of the uploaders and the videos themselves were conducted. Results: The search yielded 145 CHD-related videos from TikTok, predominantly uploaded by health professionals (n=128, 88.3%), followed by news agencies (n=6, 4.1%), nonprofit organizations (n=10, 6.9%), and for-profit organizations (n=1, 0.7%). Content comprehensiveness achieved a median score of 3 (IQR 2-4). Median values for the DISCERN, JAMA, and GQS evaluations across all videos stood at 27 (IQR 24-32), 2 (IQR 2-2), and 2 (IQR 2-3), respectively. Videos from health professionals and nonprofit organizations attained significantly superior JAMA scores in comparison to those of news agencies (P<.001 and P=.02, respectively), whereas GQS scores for videos from health professionals were also notably higher than those from news agencies (P=.048). Within health professionals, cardiologists demonstrated discernibly enhanced performance over noncardiologists in both DISCERN and GQS assessments (P=.02). Correlative analyses unveiled positive correlations between video quality and uploader metrics, encompassing the positive correlations between the number of followers; total likes; average likes per video; and established quality indices such as DISCERN, JAMA, or GQS scores. Similar investigations relating to video attributes showed correlations between user engagement factors-likes, comments, collections, shares-and the aforementioned quality indicators. In contrast, a negative correlation emerged between the number of days since upload and quality indices, while a longer video duration corresponded positively with higher DISCERN and GQS scores. Conclusions: The quality of the videos was generally poor, with significant disparities based on source category. The content comprehensiveness coverage proved insufficient, casting doubts on the reliability and quality of the information relayed through these videos. Among health professionals, video contributions from cardiologists exhibited superior quality compared to noncardiologists. As TikTok's role in health information dissemination expands, ensuring accurate and reliable content is crucial to better meet patients' needs for CHD information that conventional health education fails to fulfill.