ArticleBMC public health2026
Quality and reliability of sarcopenia-related videos on BiliBili and TikTok: a cross-sectional content analysis study.
Article in BMC public health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Quality and content evaluation of anal fistula information on TikTok and Bilibili: A cross-sectional study.Medicine · 2026Article
- Alcohol-related health information on Chinese short-video platforms: a cross-sectional content analysis of Douyin and Bilibili.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Evaluation of short video quality and reliability of non-invasive prenatal testing on TikTok and Bilibili platforms: a cross-sectional study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2026Article
- TikTok as a source of information for migraine: a content quality analysis.Oxford open digital health · 2026Article
- The quality and reliability of short videos about passive smoking on Bilibili and TikTok: A cross-sectional study.Tobacco induced diseases · 2026Article
- "Short" is not always "scientific": cross-sectional quality assessment and machine learning-based evaluation of weight management short videos on TikTok and Bilibili.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Quality and reliability of myelodysplastic syndromes-related health information on Chinese short-video platforms: a multi-platform cross-sectional analysis.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIn recent years, the prevalence of sarcopenia has risen, frequently arising as a complication of other diseases and contributing to poor prognoses. Nonetheless, public awareness of this condition remains limited. Concurrently, video platforms such as BiliBili and TikTok, which reach billions of users worldwide, have become major channels for disseminating and accessing health information. This study systematically evaluates the quality and reliability of sarcopenia-related short videos on these two platforms and underscores the public health significance of this content.
methodsWe conducted searches on October 3, 2025, using the keyword “sarcopenia” on the video-sharing platforms BiliBili and TikTok, ultimately collecting 256 relevant videos. After extracting basic information, we assessed the quality and reliability of each video using the Global Quality Score (GQS) for general quality and the modified DISCERN (mDISCERN) instrument for informational reliability.
resultsCompared to BiliBili, TikTok showed significantly higher engagement metrics for likes, comments, shares, and views (all p* < 0.05, with rank-biserial r effect sizes ranging from − 0.40 to -0.53), whereas no significant difference was observed for favorites (p* = 0.168, rank-biserial r = -0.10). The median (interquartile range) of GQS and mDISCERN scores were both 3.00 (2.00–3.00) on BiliBili, while 3.00 (3.00–4.00) and 4.00 (3.00–4.00) on TikTok. Moreover, it was observed that videos from physicians in related fields and patient-shared videos both scored highly on TikTok; however, patient videos were very few (n = 3), so this difference is not generalizable. Spearman correlation analysis revealed no significant correlation between video variables and the scores of GQS and mDISCERN.
conclusionVideos on the TikTok platform are of higher quality and reliability, and also exhibit stronger engagement. Moreover, videos uploaded by medical professionals generally have better quality than those from other sources, but they account for a low percentage. People should exercise caution when perusing videos about sarcopenia.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.