Assessment of non-small cell lung cancer online videos in China: A cross-sectional study on quality, content, understandability, actionability, and reliability.

IF 2.2 3区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Health Informatics Journal Pub Date : 2025-04-01 Epub Date: 2025-04-03 DOI:10.1177/14604582251328930
Xiaoqing Feng, Yuhui Xu, Yi Yang, Yifan Zheng, Jia Li
{"title":"Assessment of non-small cell lung cancer online videos in China: A cross-sectional study on quality, content, understandability, actionability, and reliability.","authors":"Xiaoqing Feng, Yuhui Xu, Yi Yang, Yifan Zheng, Jia Li","doi":"10.1177/14604582251328930","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Objective:</b> This study aims to conduct a multidimensional evaluation of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)-related videos on social media platforms in China (TikTok, Bilibili, and Red).<b>Methods</b>: Validated tools were used to evaluate video quality (DISCERN instrument), reliability (Journal of the American Medical Association [JAMA] benchmarks), understandability, and actionability (Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool [PEMAT]).<b>Results</b>: This study included 96 videos, primarily created by medical professionals (n = 63). The median DISCERN score was 30.0 (IQR 28.5-34.4), indicating poor quality overall. Compared to videos rated as \"good\", the \"poor\" videos had significantly shorter durations (<i>P</i> = 0.040). The overall median understandability and actionability scores were 81.8% (IQR 75.0-90.9%) and 0% (IQR 0.0-66.7%), respectively, indicating good understandability but extremely poor actionability. Only one met all four JAMA benchmarks. TikTok videos with the shortest durations garnered the highest numbers of \"likes\", \"comments\", and \"bookmarks\", while Bilibili videos exhibited a relatively high overall quality.<b>Conclusions</b>: To guide the public in making informed medical decisions, Chinese NSCLC videos need improvement in various aspects.</p>","PeriodicalId":55069,"journal":{"name":"Health Informatics Journal","volume":"31 2","pages":"14604582251328930"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Informatics Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14604582251328930","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/4/3 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: This study aims to conduct a multidimensional evaluation of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)-related videos on social media platforms in China (TikTok, Bilibili, and Red).Methods: Validated tools were used to evaluate video quality (DISCERN instrument), reliability (Journal of the American Medical Association [JAMA] benchmarks), understandability, and actionability (Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool [PEMAT]).Results: This study included 96 videos, primarily created by medical professionals (n = 63). The median DISCERN score was 30.0 (IQR 28.5-34.4), indicating poor quality overall. Compared to videos rated as "good", the "poor" videos had significantly shorter durations (P = 0.040). The overall median understandability and actionability scores were 81.8% (IQR 75.0-90.9%) and 0% (IQR 0.0-66.7%), respectively, indicating good understandability but extremely poor actionability. Only one met all four JAMA benchmarks. TikTok videos with the shortest durations garnered the highest numbers of "likes", "comments", and "bookmarks", while Bilibili videos exhibited a relatively high overall quality.Conclusions: To guide the public in making informed medical decisions, Chinese NSCLC videos need improvement in various aspects.

中国非小细胞肺癌在线视频的评估:质量、内容、可理解性、可操作性和可靠性的横断面研究
研究目的本研究旨在对中国社交媒体平台(TikTok、Bilibili 和 Red)上与非小细胞肺癌(NSCLC)相关的视频进行多维度评估:采用经过验证的工具评估视频质量(DISCERN工具)、可靠性(《美国医学会杂志》[JAMA]基准)、可理解性和可操作性(患者教育材料评估工具[PEMAT]):本研究包括 96 个视频,主要由医疗专业人员制作(n = 63)。DISCERN 评分的中位数为 30.0(IQR 28.5-34.4),表明整体质量较差。与被评为 "好 "的视频相比,"差 "的视频持续时间明显较短(P = 0.040)。可理解性和可操作性的总体得分中位数分别为 81.8%(IQR 75.0-90.9%)和 0%(IQR 0.0-66.7%),表明可理解性良好,但可操作性极差。只有一个符合《美国医学会杂志》的所有四项基准。时长最短的 TikTok 视频获得的 "赞"、"评论 "和 "书签 "数量最多,而 Bilibili 视频的整体质量相对较高:结论:为了引导公众做出明智的医疗决策,中国的NSCLC视频在各个方面都需要改进。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
Health Informatics Journal
Health Informatics Journal HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-MEDICAL INFORMATICS
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
6.70%
发文量
80
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: Health Informatics Journal is an international peer-reviewed journal. All papers submitted to Health Informatics Journal are subject to peer review by members of a carefully appointed editorial board. The journal operates a conventional single-blind reviewing policy in which the reviewer’s name is always concealed from the submitting author.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信