ArticleFrontiers in public health2026
Assessment of the quality and reliability of public health communication about hypertension on short video platforms in China.
Article in Frontiers in public 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Hypertension is one of the major modifiable cardiovascular risk factors in China. Persistent and poorly controlled hypertension contributes to a wide spectrum of adverse cardiovascular outcomes, yet public awareness and understanding of the condition remain suboptimal. With the rapid expansion of digital media, social platforms have emerged as important channels for disseminating health information. This study evaluates the quality of hypertension-related content presented in short-video formats on widely used social media platforms. Methods: Newly registered accounts were used to retrieve the top 100 videos from Douyin, Bilibili, and Kwai based on each platform's default comprehensive ranking algorithm. The collected videos were subsequently screened following predefined criteria, which included removal of duplicates, silent clips, advertisements, irrelevant content, and non-Chinese language videos. In addition, videos produced by the same creator on the same platform were consolidated into a single entry to avoid redundancy. The reliability of the videos was assessed using the DISCERN instrument, and their overall quality was evaluated with the Global Quality Scale (GQS). A comparative analysis was further performed to examine differences in video characteristics and quality across the three short-video platforms. Results: A total of 267 videos from various creators were included in the analysis, with Douyin contributing 36.3% (140/267), Bilibili 31.1% (83/267), and Kwai 32.6% (87/267). With respect to video sources, non-specialist physicians produced the largest proportion of content (52.4%, 140/267), followed by specialist physicians (31.5%, 84/267). In the assessment of overall video quality, Bilibili demonstrated the highest completeness scores ( Conclusion: Overall, the quality of the videos was suboptimal. Although hypertension-related content produced by nonprofit organizations and cardiovascular specialists achieved higher scores in overall quality, the presentation of these videos was relatively uniform. This homogeneity limited the breadth of hypertension-related knowledge that viewers could obtain from short-video platforms.
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.