global quality score

全球质量评分
  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:近年来,中国肝癌的发病率一直在上升,导致公众越来越关注这种疾病的负担。关于肝癌的短视频通过TikTok和Bilibili应用程序传播,近年来,它作为一种易于获取的健康信息来源而受到欢迎。然而,信誉,质量,这些短视频中的信息的有用性以及在这些平台中上传基于健康信息的视频的个人的专业知识尚未被评估。
    目的:我们的研究旨在评估在TikTok和Bilibili短视频分享平台上分享的中国肝癌短视频的信息质量。
    方法:在2023年3月,我们通过使用2种评级工具,评估了TikTok和Bilibili中排名前100位的中国肝癌短视频(总共200个视频)的信息质量和可靠性,即,全球质量评分(GQS)和DISCERN仪器。应用相关性和泊松回归分析来讨论可能影响视频质量的因素。
    结果:与Bilibili相比,TikTok更受欢迎,尽管TikTok上的视频长度比Bilibili上的视频长度短(P<.001)。TikTok和Bilibili的肝癌短视频质量不理想,GQS中位数为3(IQR2-4)和2(IQR1-5),DISCERN分数中位数为5(IQR4-6)和4(IQR2-7),分别。总的来说,来自专业机构和个人的视频质量优于来自非专业人员的视频质量,涉及疾病相关知识的视频比报道和新闻的视频质量更好。不同职业个人上传的视频质量无显著差异,除了中医专业人士上传的内容外,这表明质量较差。只有视频份额与GQS呈正相关(r=0.17,P=0.01),没有视频变量可以预测视频质量。
    结论:我们的研究表明,Bilibili和TikTok的肝癌相关健康信息短视频质量较差,但是医疗保健专业人员上传的视频在全面性和内容质量方面可以被认为是可靠的。因此,提供有关TikTok和Bilibili医疗信息的短视频,必须由积极的信息寻求者仔细考虑科学的合理性,然后才能对其医疗保健管理做出决定。
    Liver cancer incidence has been increasing in China in the recent years, leading to increased public concern regarding the burden of this disease. Short videos on liver cancer are disseminated through TikTok and Bilibili apps, which have gained popularity in recent years as an easily accessible source of health information. However, the credibility, quality, and usefulness of the information in these short videos and the professional knowledge of the individuals uploading health information-based videos in these platforms have not yet been evaluated.
    Our study aims to assess the quality of the information in Chinese short videos on liver cancer shared on the TikTok and Bilibili short video-sharing platforms.
    In March 2023, we assessed the top 100 Chinese short videos on liver cancer in TikTok and Bilibili (200 videos in total) for their information quality and reliability by using 2 rating tools, namely, global quality score (GQS) and the DISCERN instrument. Correlation and Poisson regression analyses were applied to discuss the factors that could impact video quality.
    Compared to Bilibili, TikTok is more popular, although the length of the videos on TikTok is shorter than that of the videos on Bilibili (P<.001). The quality of the short videos on liver cancer in TikTok and Bilibili was not satisfactory, with median GQS of 3 (IQR 2-4) and 2 (IQR 1-5) and median DISCERN scores of 5 (IQR 4-6) and 4 (IQR 2-7), respectively. In general, the quality of videos sourced from professional institutions and individuals was better than that of those sourced from nonprofessionals, and videos involving disease-related knowledge were of better quality than those covering news and reports. No significant differences were found in the quality of videos uploaded by individuals from different professions, with the exception of those uploaded by traditional Chinese medicine professionals, which demonstrated poorer quality. Only video shares were positively correlated with the GQS (r=0.17, P=.01), and no video variables could predict the video quality.
    Our study shows that the quality of short videos on health information related to liver cancer is poor on Bilibili and TikTok, but videos uploaded by health care professionals can be considered reliable in terms of comprehensiveness and content quality. Thus, short videos providing medical information on TikTok and Bilibili must be carefully considered for scientific soundness by active information seekers before they make decisions on their health care management.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:TikTok是消费者获取和采纳健康信息的重要渠道。但TikTok中健康内容的质量仍未得到充分调查。
    目的:我们的研究旨在确定上传来源,内容,和TikTok上胆结石疾病视频的特征信息,并进一步评估与视频质量相关的因素。
    方法:我们调查了TikTok上的前100个与胆结石相关的视频,并分析了这些视频的上传来源,内容,和特点。使用DISCERN仪器等定量评分工具评估视频质量,美国医学会杂志(JAMA)基准标准,和全球质量分数(GQS)。此外,视频质量和视频特征之间的相关性,包括持续时间,喜欢,注释,和股份,进一步调查。
    结果:根据视频来源,81%的视频是由医生发布的。此外,疾病知识是最主要的视频内容,占所有视频的56%。意思是否定的,JAMA,所有100个视频的GQS得分为39.61(SD11.36),2.00(标准差0.40),和2.76(标准差0.95),分别。根据DISCERN和GQS,与胆结石相关的视频\'TikTok上的质量得分不高,主要在博览会上(43/100,43%,)和中等(46/100,46%)。医生的DISCERN总分明显高于个人和通讯社,手术技术明显高于生活方式和新闻,疾病知识明显高于新闻,分别。DISCERN评分与视频持续时间呈正相关。DISCERN分数与视频的喜欢和份额之间存在负相关。在GQS分析中,基于不同来源或不同内容的组间没有发现显著差异。由于缺乏辨别力和无法准确评估视频质量,JAMA在视频质量和相关性分析中被排除在外。
    结论:尽管TikTok上的胆结石视频主要由医生提供,并且包含疾病知识,质量很低。我们发现视频持续时间和视频质量之间存在正相关。高质量的视频受到较低的关注,受欢迎的视频质量很低。目前TikTok上的医疗信息还不够严谨,无法指导患者做出准确的判断。由于信息的质量和可靠性低,TikTok不是教育患者的适当知识来源。
    TikTok was an important channel for consumers to access and adopt health information. But the quality of health content in TikTok remains underinvestigated.
    Our study aimed to identify upload sources, contents, and feature information of gallstone disease videos on TikTok and further evaluated the factors related to video quality.
    We investigated the first 100 gallstone-related videos on TikTok and analyzed these videos\' upload sources, content, and characteristics. The quality of videos was evaluated using quantitative scoring tools such as DISCERN instrument, the Journal of American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmark criteria, and Global Quality Scores (GQS). Moreover, the correlation between video quality and video characteristics, including duration, likes, comments, and shares, was further investigated.
    According to video sources, 81% of the videos were posted by doctors. Furthermore, disease knowledge was the most dominant video content, accounting for 56% of all the videos. The mean DISCERN, JAMA, and GQS scores of all 100 videos are 39.61 (SD 11.36), 2.00 (SD 0.40), and 2.76 (SD 0.95), respectively. According to DISCERN and GQS, gallstone-related videos\' quality score on TikTok is not high, mainly at fair (43/100, 43%,) and moderate (46/100, 46%). The total DISCERN scores of doctors were significantly higher than that of individuals and news agencies, surgery techniques were significantly higher than lifestyle and news, and disease knowledge was significantly higher than news, respectively. DISCERN scores and video duration were positively correlated. Negative correlations were found between DISCERN scores and likes and shares of videos. In GQS analysis, no significant differences were found between groups based on different sources or different contents. JAMA was excluded in the video quality and correlation analysis due to a lack of discrimination and inability to evaluate the video quality accurately.
    Although the videos of gallstones on TikTok are mainly provided by doctors and contain disease knowledge, they are of low quality. We found a positive correlation between video duration and video quality. High-quality videos received low attention, and popular videos were of low quality. Medical information on TikTok is currently not rigorous enough to guide patients to make accurate judgments. TikTok was not an appropriate source of knowledge to educate patients due to the low quality and reliability of the information.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

公众号