• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

基于视频分享平台的公众对益生菌认知现状。

Status quo of the public's knowledge of probiotics based on video-sharing platforms.

机构信息

Department of Gastroenterology, Changhai Hospital, the Naval Military Medical University, 168 Changhai Road, Shanghai, 200433, China.

Department of General Medicine, Beicai Community Health Service Center of Pudong New District, Shanghai, China.

出版信息

BMC Public Health. 2023 Mar 28;23(1):574. doi: 10.1186/s12889-023-15456-7.

DOI:10.1186/s12889-023-15456-7
PMID:36978067
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10043532/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Probiotics have been deemed multipotent and unprecedentedly applied in the health field recently. However, there are challenges in promoting credible and reliable resources while avoiding misinformation regarding probiotics for the public.

METHODS

This study analysed 400 eligible probiotic-related videos selected from YouTube, and the three most popular video-sharing platforms (Bilibili, Weibo and TikTok) in China. Video retrieval was performed on September 5, 2022. GQS and tailored DISCERN tool assess each video's quality, usage, and reliability. A comparative analysis of videos from different sources was carried out.

RESULTS

The identity distribution of probiotic video-producers was predominantly experts (n = 202, 50.50%), followed by amateurs (n = 161, 40.25%) and health-related institutions (n = 37, 9.25%). The videos' content category mainly discussed the function of probiotics (n = 120, 30%), the way to choose suitable products (n = 81, 20.25%), and the methods for taking probiotics (n = 71, 17.75%).The overall quality of videos was moderate (3/5 point) assessed by GQS, while the usage (1/6 point) and reliability (2/5 point) detailing probiotics assessed by tailored DISCERN tool were poor. The attitude of probiotic video-producers was primarily positive (n = 323, 80.75%), followed by neutral (n = 52, 13.00%) and negative (n = 25, 6.25%) (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The current study showed that videos on social media platforms publicise important information including the concepts, usage, and precautions of probiotics to the public. But the overall quality of uploaded videos about probiotics was unsatisfactory. More efforts are needed to improve the higher-quality content of probiotic-related online videos and better propagate probiotic knowledge to the public in the future.

摘要

背景

益生菌被认为具有多功能性,最近在健康领域得到了前所未有的应用。然而,在为公众宣传益生菌的可信可靠资源的同时,也面临着避免错误信息的挑战。

方法

本研究分析了从中国三个最受欢迎的视频分享平台(Bilibili、Weibo 和 TikTok)和 YouTube 上选择的 400 个符合条件的益生菌相关视频。视频检索于 2022 年 9 月 5 日进行。GQS 和定制的 DISCERN 工具评估每个视频的质量、使用情况和可靠性。对来自不同来源的视频进行了比较分析。

结果

益生菌视频制作人员的身份分布以专家为主(n=202,50.50%),其次是业余爱好者(n=161,40.25%)和与健康相关的机构(n=37,9.25%)。视频的内容类别主要讨论益生菌的功能(n=120,30%)、选择合适产品的方法(n=81,20.25%)和服用益生菌的方法(n=71,17.75%)。GQS 评估的总体视频质量为中等(3/5 分),而定制的 DISCERN 工具评估的益生菌使用(1/6 分)和可靠性(2/5 分)较差。益生菌视频制作人员的态度主要为积极(n=323,80.75%),其次为中立(n=52,13.00%)和消极(n=25,6.25%)(P<0.001)。

结论

本研究表明,社交媒体平台上的视频向公众宣传了益生菌的概念、使用和注意事项等重要信息。但是,上传的益生菌相关视频的整体质量不尽如人意。未来需要付出更多努力,提高益生菌相关网络视频的高质量内容,并向公众更好地传播益生菌知识。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/347c/10045861/77bd998bfd53/12889_2023_15456_Fig6_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/347c/10045861/fe614209fbe0/12889_2023_15456_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/347c/10045861/9108e5b9d39f/12889_2023_15456_Fig2_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/347c/10045861/46169c986847/12889_2023_15456_Fig3_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/347c/10045861/61772ae0b1d6/12889_2023_15456_Fig4_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/347c/10045861/445dc4dbcb79/12889_2023_15456_Fig5_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/347c/10045861/77bd998bfd53/12889_2023_15456_Fig6_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/347c/10045861/fe614209fbe0/12889_2023_15456_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/347c/10045861/9108e5b9d39f/12889_2023_15456_Fig2_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/347c/10045861/46169c986847/12889_2023_15456_Fig3_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/347c/10045861/61772ae0b1d6/12889_2023_15456_Fig4_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/347c/10045861/445dc4dbcb79/12889_2023_15456_Fig5_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/347c/10045861/77bd998bfd53/12889_2023_15456_Fig6_HTML.jpg

相似文献

1
Status quo of the public's knowledge of probiotics based on video-sharing platforms.基于视频分享平台的公众对益生菌认知现状。
BMC Public Health. 2023 Mar 28;23(1):574. doi: 10.1186/s12889-023-15456-7.
2
YouTube/ Bilibili/ TikTok videos as sources of medical information on laryngeal carcinoma: cross-sectional content analysis study.YouTube/ Bilibili/ TikTok 视频作为喉癌医学信息来源:横断面内容分析研究。
BMC Public Health. 2024 Jun 14;24(1):1594. doi: 10.1186/s12889-024-19077-6.
3
Quality and Reliability of Liver Cancer-Related Short Chinese Videos on TikTok and Bilibili: Cross-Sectional Content Analysis Study.肝癌相关短视频在 TikTok 和 Bilibili 上的质量与可靠性:一项横断面内容分析研究。
J Med Internet Res. 2023 Jul 5;25:e47210. doi: 10.2196/47210.
4
Quality of Information in Gallstone Disease Videos on TikTok: Cross-sectional Study.TikTok 胆囊疾病相关视频信息质量:一项横断面研究
J Med Internet Res. 2023 Feb 8;25:e39162. doi: 10.2196/39162.
5
Bilibili, TikTok, and YouTube as sources of information on gastric cancer: assessment and analysis of the content and quality.哔哩哔哩、抖音和 YouTube 作为胃癌信息来源:内容和质量评估与分析。
BMC Public Health. 2024 Jan 2;24(1):57. doi: 10.1186/s12889-023-17323-x.
6
Assessment of the reliability and quality of breast cancer related videos on TikTok and Bilibili: cross-sectional study in China.TikTok和哔哩哔哩上乳腺癌相关视频的可靠性和质量评估:中国的横断面研究
Front Public Health. 2024 Jan 22;11:1296386. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2023.1296386. eCollection 2023.
7
Is the information about orthodontics on Youtube and TikTok reliable for the oral health of the public? A cross sectional comparative study.Youtube 和 TikTok 上有关牙齿矫正的信息对公众的口腔健康可靠吗?一项横断面比较研究。
J Stomatol Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2022 Oct;123(5):e349-e354. doi: 10.1016/j.jormas.2022.04.009. Epub 2022 Apr 22.
8
TikTok and Bilibili as sources of information on Helicobacter pylori in China: A content and quality analysis.中国的TikTok和哔哩哔哩作为幽门螺杆菌信息来源:内容与质量分析
Helicobacter. 2023 Oct;28(5):e13007. doi: 10.1111/hel.13007. Epub 2023 Jul 15.
9
Douyin and Bilibili as sources of information on lung cancer in China through assessment and analysis of the content and quality.通过评估和分析内容与质量,研究中国的肺癌患者如何利用抖音和哔哩哔哩获取信息。
Sci Rep. 2024 Sep 4;14(1):20604. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-70640-y.
10
TikTok and YouTube as sources of information on anal fissure: A comparative analysis.TikTok 和 YouTube 作为肛裂信息来源的比较分析。
Front Public Health. 2022 Nov 3;10:1000338. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2022.1000338. eCollection 2022.

引用本文的文献

1
Genesis, Health Benefits, and Future Perspectives of Probiotics: Exploring Endogenous and Exogenous Classes, Innovations, and Research Gaps.益生菌的起源、健康益处及未来展望:探索内源性和外源性类别、创新与研究空白
Probiotics Antimicrob Proteins. 2025 Sep 10. doi: 10.1007/s12602-025-10756-3.
2
Assessment of information quality and reliability on ankle sprains in short videos from Douyin and Bilibili.对抖音和哔哩哔哩短视频中踝关节扭伤信息质量和可靠性的评估。
Sci Rep. 2025 Jul 2;15(1):22654. doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-07656-5.
3
YouTube and Bilibili as sources of information on oral cancer: cross-sectional content analysis study.

本文引用的文献

1
Microbiota in the stomach and application of probiotics to gastroduodenal diseases.胃中的微生物群及益生菌在胃十二指肠疾病中的应用。
World J Gastroenterol. 2022 Dec 21;28(47):6702-6715. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v28.i47.6702.
2
Intention of health experts to counter health misinformation in social media: Effects of perceived threat to online users, correction efficacy, and self-affirmation.健康专家在社交媒体上对抗健康错误信息的意图:对网络用户感知威胁、纠正效果和自我肯定的影响。
Public Underst Sci. 2023 Apr;32(3):284-303. doi: 10.1177/09636625221138357. Epub 2022 Dec 14.
3
Quality of Internet Videos Related to Pediatric Urology in Mainland China: A Cross-Sectional Study.
YouTube和哔哩哔哩作为口腔癌信息来源:横断面内容分析研究
Sci Rep. 2025 Jul 1;15(1):21671. doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-02898-9.
4
Hip fractures in Chinese TikTok (Douyin) short videos: an analysis of information quality, content and user comment attitudes.中国抖音短视频中的髋部骨折:信息质量、内容及用户评论态度分析
Front Public Health. 2025 Apr 24;13:1563188. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2025.1563188. eCollection 2025.
5
Counterfeit anti-choking suction devices: Prevalence and risks on online marketplaces.假冒防窒息吸引装置:在线市场上的流行情况及风险
Resusc Plus. 2025 Feb 10;22:100899. doi: 10.1016/j.resplu.2025.100899. eCollection 2025 Mar.
6
Health-Related Messages About Herbs, Spices, and Other Botanicals Appearing in Print Issues and Websites of Legacy Media: Content Analysis and Evaluation.传统媒体印刷版和网站上出现的有关草药、香料及其他植物药的健康相关信息:内容分析与评估
JMIR Form Res. 2024 Dec 4;8:e63281. doi: 10.2196/63281.
7
Quality assessment of videos on social media platforms related to gestational diabetes mellitus in China: A cross-section study.中国社交媒体平台上与妊娠期糖尿病相关视频的质量评估:一项横断面研究。
Heliyon. 2024 Mar 31;10(7):e29020. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e29020. eCollection 2024 Apr 15.
8
The status quo of short videos as a source of health information regarding bowel preparation before colonoscopy.短视频作为结肠镜检查前肠道准备健康信息来源的现状。
Front Public Health. 2024 Feb 13;12:1309632. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2024.1309632. eCollection 2024.
9
The quality and reliability of TikTok videos on non-alcoholic fatty liver disease: a propensity score matching analysis.非酒精性脂肪性肝病 TikTok 视频的质量和可靠性:倾向评分匹配分析。
Front Public Health. 2023 Oct 4;11:1231240. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2023.1231240. eCollection 2023.
中国大陆小儿泌尿外科相关互联网视频质量的横断面研究。
Front Public Health. 2022 Jun 15;10:924748. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2022.924748. eCollection 2022.
4
Probiotics and dairy products in dentistry: A bibliometric and critical review of randomized clinical trials.益生菌和乳制品在牙科中的应用:随机临床试验的文献计量学和批判性评价。
Food Res Int. 2022 Jul;157:111228. doi: 10.1016/j.foodres.2022.111228. Epub 2022 Apr 8.
5
Is YouTube a reliable source of health-related information? A systematic review.YouTube 是健康相关信息的可靠来源吗?一项系统评价。
BMC Med Educ. 2022 May 19;22(1):382. doi: 10.1186/s12909-022-03446-z.
6
The future of functional food: Emerging technologies application on prebiotics, probiotics and postbiotics.功能性食品的未来:益生菌、益生元和后生元的新兴技术应用。
Compr Rev Food Sci Food Saf. 2022 May;21(3):2560-2586. doi: 10.1111/1541-4337.12962. Epub 2022 Apr 26.
7
A Video-Based Behavioral Intervention Associated with Improved HPV Knowledge and Intention to Vaccinate.一种基于视频的行为干预与HPV知识的改善及接种疫苗意愿相关。
Vaccines (Basel). 2022 Apr 5;10(4):562. doi: 10.3390/vaccines10040562.
8
Social Media-Delivered Patient Education to Enhance Self-management and Attitudes of Patients with Type 2 Diabetes During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Randomized Controlled Trial.社交媒体为 2 型糖尿病患者提供的在线教育对其自我管理和态度的影响:一项随机对照试验。
J Med Internet Res. 2022 Mar 23;24(3):e31449. doi: 10.2196/31449.
9
A Deadly Infodemic: Social Media and the Power of COVID-19 Misinformation.致命的信息疫情:社交媒体与新冠病毒错误信息的力量。
J Med Internet Res. 2022 Feb 1;24(2):e35552. doi: 10.2196/35552.
10
Videos, Views, and Vaccines: Evaluating the Quality of COVID-19 Communications on YouTube.视频、浏览量与疫苗:评估YouTube上新冠疫情相关信息的质量
Disaster Med Public Health Prep. 2021 Aug 31;17:e42. doi: 10.1017/dmp.2021.284.