ArticleFrontiers in medicine2026
Quality assessment of dry eye educational videos on Xiaohongshu and differences by uploader type.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Xiaohongshu has become an important platform for the public to obtain eye health information, but the quality and uploader-related differences of dry eye educational videos remain unclear. Methods: In this cross-sectional study, Xiaohongshu's "Video" section was searched on April 16, 2026, using the Chinese keyword "" (dry eye). The first 200 videos generated by the default sorting algorithm were screened. After excluding duplicate, promotional, off-topic, and reposted content, 136 videos were included. As all eligible videos were uploaded by individual accounts, comparisons were performed between non-medical individual users and individual medical users. Video characteristics, content coverage, and engagement metrics were extracted, and video quality was assessed using DISCERN, PEMAT-A/V, and the Global Quality Score. Results: Among the 136 included videos, 108 were uploaded by non-medical individual users and 28 by individual medical users. Video content was mainly concentrated on lifestyle recommendations (87.5%) and treatment or management strategies (62.5%), whereas topics such as definition, diagnosis, classification, and follow-up were less frequently covered. Compared with videos uploaded by individual medical users, those uploaded by non-medical individual users had a higher prevalence of incorrect or potentially misleading information (57.4% vs. 10.7%; OR = 11.23, 95% CI: 3.20-39.47). In addition, videos uploaded by individual medical users scored significantly higher than those from non-medical individual users in DISCERN total score, PEMAT understandability, PEMAT actionability, and GQS score, with all comparisons reaching statistical significance (all Conclusion: Dry eye-related videos on Xiaohongshu varied substantially in quality and mainly emphasized lifestyle recommendations and treatment management, with limited coverage of systematic medical knowledge. In this cross-sectional sample, videos uploaded by individual medical users were associated with higher quality scores, broader content coverage, and a lower prevalence of incorrect or potentially misleading information than videos from non-medical individual users. These findings suggest the potential value of platform-level quality control, improved mechanisms for identifying and recommending professional content, and greater participation of ophthalmic healthcare professionals in standardized science communication.
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.