ArticlePloS one2026
Assessing the reliability and quality of content on social media regarding biologic therapies for psoriasis: A cross-sectional content analysis.
Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Understanding Social Drivers of Health Among US Adults with Psoriasis from Different Races and Ethnicities.Dermatology and therapy · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBiologic agents are an important novel therapeutic option for moderate-to-severe psoriasis. In recent years, TikTok and Bilibili have gradually become important channels for Chinese patients to obtain health information. This study aims to evaluate the content, quality, reliability, and transparency of videos related to biologic therapy for psoriasis on these platforms.
methodsWe searched both platforms using the dual keywords "psoriasis" and "biological agents," confirmed compliance with relevant criteria, and collected the top 150 videos based on their composite rankings. Fundamental characteristics, uploader categories, and content types were documented. Two independent reviewers evaluated video quality using the mDISCERN, GQS, and the JAMA criteria. Nonparametric tests were performed for group comparisons, and Spearman correlation analysis was applied.
resultsBilibili videos more frequently addressed medical expenses, types of biologic agents, and recurrence, whereas TikTok videos focused on etiology and clinical manifestations. The video quality was barely acceptable. On TikTok, the median GQS, mDISCERN, and JAMA scores were 3.00 (2.25, 4.00), 3.00 (3.00, 4.00), and 2.00 (2.00, 3.00). On Bilibili, the median scores were 3.00 (2.00, 4.00), 3.00 (2.00, 4.00), and 1.00 (1.00, 3.00). Videos uploaded by professional organizations achieved the highest GQS (median 4.00, IQR: 4.00-4.00) but had the lowest engagement. Engagement metrics showed a moderate correlation with quality scores (P < 0.05).
conclusionsThis study found that videos related to biologic therapy for psoriasis lack content completeness, with overall quality, reliability, and transparency remaining at a suboptimal level. Greater participation by professional organizations and increased visibility of their videos should be encouraged to promote the dissemination of high-quality content. This study provides preliminary insights for health communication strategies and highlights the necessity of strengthening content regulation.
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.