Table 4 Misinformation Analysis and Educational Value Assessment.
From: Quality evaluation of stroke-related information on TikTok: a cross-sectional study
Assessment Category | All Videos (n = 100) | Healthcare Professionals (n = 34) | Content Creators (n = 45) | General Users (n = 21) | p-value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Misinformation Categories | |||||
Any inaccurate information, n (%) | 31 (31.0) | 3 (8.8) | 19 (42.2) | 9 (42.9) | < 0.001 |
Unproven treatments promoted, n (%) | 12 (12.0) | 0 (0.0) | 8 (17.8) | 4 (19.0) | 0.010 |
Incorrect symptom information, n (%) | 8 (8.0) | 1 (2.9) | 5 (11.1) | 2 (9.5) | 0.335 |
Misleading prevention claims, n (%) | 7 (7.0) | 0 (0.0) | 4 (8.9) | 3 (14.3) | 0.074 |
Dangerous home remedies, n (%) | 4 (4.0) | 0 (0.0) | 2 (4.4) | 2 (9.5) | 0.162 |
Delayed care recommendations, n (%) | 3 (3.0) | 0 (0.0) | 2 (4.4) | 1 (4.8) | 0.382 |
Educational Value Components | |||||
Evidence-based information, n (%) | 42 (42.0) | 28 (82.4) | 12 (26.7) | 2 (9.5) | < 0.001 |
References to guidelines, n (%) | 19 (19.0) | 16 (47.1) | 3 (6.7) | 0 (0.0) | < 0.001 |
Statistical data provided, n (%) | 15 (15.0) | 11 (32.4) | 3 (6.7) | 1 (4.8) | 0.002 |
Clear action steps, n (%) | 38 (38.0) | 19 (55.9) | 14 (31.1) | 5 (23.8) | 0.019 |
Risk communication, n (%) | 25 (25.0) | 14 (41.2) | 8 (17.8) | 3 (14.3) | 0.024 |
Visual and Presentation Elements | |||||
Medical imagery used, n (%) | 34 (34.0) | 18 (52.9) | 12 (26.7) | 4 (19.0) | 0.010 |
Demonstration/simulation, n (%) | 28 (28.0) | 12 (35.3) | 11 (24.4) | 5 (23.8) | 0.458 |
Infographics/charts, n (%) | 22 (22.0) | 13 (38.2) | 7 (15.6) | 2 (9.5) | 0.015 |
Personal testimony, n (%) | 41 (41.0) | 8 (23.5) | 18 (40.0) | 15 (71.4) | 0.001 |
Emotional appeal, n (%) | 36 (36.0) | 7 (20.6) | 19 (42.2) | 10 (47.6) | 0.027 |
