ArticleBMC oral health2026
Quality of information about potentially malignant oral disorders on TikTok: a cross-sectional analysis in the context of social media.
Article in BMC oral health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivePotentially malignant oral disorders (PMODs) can progress to oral cancer, making the quality of available health information especially relevant. This research aimed to analyze TikTok content related to potentially malignant oral disorders (PMOD), considering aspects such as source, duration, and content quality. MATERIALS AND
methodsA cross-sectional observational study was conducted to analyze TikTok videos related to potentially malignant oral disorders (PMODs), using the hashtags #leukoplakia, #lichen planus, #actinic cheilitis, #oral lichenoid lesions, and #erythroplasia. English- and Spanish-language videos were included; duplicates, unrelated, advertising, or silent videos were excluded. Video characteristics, engagement (views, likes, comments, saves, shares), viewing and interaction indices, and type of uploader were recorded. Two evaluators scored the content with DISCERN and the Global Quality Scale (GQS).
resultsA total of 96 videos were analyzed. The largest group of creators were nano-influencers (1-10,000 followers; 58.3%). The DISCERN score had a median of 25 (IQR: 22-29), and most of the videos obtained very low Global Quality Scale (GQS) scores (median 2; IQR: 1-2). A very strong correlation was observed between DISCERN and GQS (r = 0.890, p < 0.001). Videos addressing actinic cheilitis obtained slightly higher scores, although the differences were not statistically significant.
conclusionThe overall quality of TikTok videos on potentially malignant oral disorders was low. DISCERN and GQS scores showed a strong correlation, and quality was not related to popularity or engagement metrics. These findings highlight the importance of healthcare professionals contributing accurate information to social media, and the need to adapt or develop evaluation tools for video-based content.
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.