MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414280961 · doi:10.2196/73855

Quality and Reliability of Transarterial Chemoembolization Videos on TikTok and Bilibili: Cross-Sectional Content Analysis Study

2025· article· en· W4414280961 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Gi Chang Song, Zheyu Niu, Cuicui Li, Na Han, Xiaohong Hou

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Formative Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth Literacy and Information Accessibility
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReliability (semiconductor)Quality (philosophy)Content analysisHealth careWork (physics)Information qualitySocial media

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) is a widely used treatment for advanced, unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma, often requiring multiple sessions for optimal efficacy. TikTok and Bilibili have gained widespread popularity as easily accessible sources of health information. Objective: This study aims to assess the quality of the information in Chinese short videos on TACE shared on TikTok and Bilibili. Methods: In November 2024, the top 100 TACE-related Chinese-language short videos on TikTok and Bilibili (a total of 200 videos) were assessed and reviewed. Initially, basic information about the videos was recorded and analyzed. Subsequently, Global Quality Score and the DISCERN tool were used to evaluate the information quality and reliability of the videos on both platforms. Finally, multifactorial analysis was used to identify potential factors influencing the quality of the videos. Results: TikTok is more popular than Bilibili, despite its videos being shorter in length (P<.001). The quality of short videos on TACE found on both platforms was of low quality, with average Global Quality Score scores of 2.31 (SD 0.81) on TikTok and 2.48 (SD 0.80) on Bilibili, as well as DISCERN scores of 1.86 (SD 0.40) on TikTok and 2.00 (SD 0.44) on Bilibili. The number of saves (β=.184, P=.008; β=.176, P=.01) and days (β=.214, P=.002; β=.168, P=.01) since publication were identified as closely related variables to video quality and reliability. Furthermore, the duration of the video was closely related to its reliability (β=.213, P=.002). Conclusions: This study indicates that the quality of TACE-related health information in the top 100 short videos on both Bilibili and TikTok platforms is suboptimal. Patients should exercise caution when relying on health-related information from these platforms. Social media companies should establish review teams with basic medical knowledge. It is essential for the platforms to enhance their recommendation algorithms and implement measures for video quality assessment. Health care professionals should be aware of the limitations of these videos and work to improve their quality.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.031
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.031
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.244
GPT teacher head0.607
Teacher spread0.363 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Formative ResearchSame topicHealth Literacy and Information AccessibilityFrench-language works237,207