Medical misinformation in social media: Representations of gastrointestinal disorders on a short video platform

Matthew T Bell,Alicia Stephan,Nicholas Cumpian,Hawwa Alao,Pradeep R Atla,Neetika Srivastava,Wayne M Fleischman,Viktor E Eysselein,Sofiya Reicher
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/00178969241288956
2024-10-09
Health Education Journal
Abstract:Health Education Journal, Ahead of Print. Background and Objectives:Short video platforms have become one of the most common methods for disseminating medical information on social media. We analysed gastrointestinal (GI)-related content on TikTok, focusing on the creators' background, patterns of content utilisation and overall content quality and understandability, using validated metrics to quantify the degree of misinformation.Methods:Twelve hashtags related to common GI conditions on TikTok and the 20 most engaging posts associated with each hashtag were selected for review. The 'most engaging' status was determined by the application's internal algorithm. Six GI board-certified physicians evaluated the videos using two validated instruments: DISCERN quality criteria and Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT-A/V) survey.Results:In total, 253 videos were reviewed with 18.6 billion likes, 191,000 comments, 935,000 saves and 927,000 shares. IBS hashtag had the greatest number of views (2.2 billion), while videos on haemorrhoids had the most likes (4.3 million), comments (59,000) and shares (288,000). Most videos 177/253 (70%) were created by non-healthcare workers. The median video quality was 2/5 on DISCERN Likert-type scale with 23/75 DISCERN score. Of 186 videos, 114 (61.3%) were rated 'very poor'; 58/186 (31.2%) 'poor', 13/186 (7%) 'fair' and only one video (0.5%) was rated 'excellent' on DISCERN grading system. The median PEMAT-A/V scores were 7/12 (73.9%) for understandability and 1/3 (33.3%) for actionability.Conclusion:Our study highlights significant public interest in common GI disorders. However, most posts lacked substantive information and did not have verifiable sources.
public, environmental & occupational health,education & educational research
What problem does this paper attempt to address?