• 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

短视频作为结肠镜检查前肠道准备健康信息来源的现状。

The status quo of short videos as a source of health information regarding bowel preparation before colonoscopy.

机构信息

Department of Gastroenterology, Jiangxi Medical College, Affiliated Ganzhou People's Hospital, Nanchang University, Ganzhou, China.

Department of Gastroenterology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, Nanchang, Jiangxi, China.

出版信息

Front Public Health. 2024 Feb 13;12:1309632. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2024.1309632. eCollection 2024.

DOI:10.3389/fpubh.2024.1309632
PMID:38414898
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10896954/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

For high-quality colonoscopies, adequate bowel preparation is a prerequisite, closely associated with the diagnostic accuracy and therapeutic safety of colonoscopy. Although popular-science short videos can help people quickly access health information, the overall quality of such short videos as a source of health information regarding bowel preparation before colonoscopy is unclear. Therefore, we intend to conduct a cross-sectional study to investigate the quality of bowel preparation information before colonoscopy through short videos taken on TikTok and Bilibili.

METHODS

The Chinese phrases "colonoscopy" and "bowel preparation" were used as keywords to search for and screen the top 100 videos in the comprehensive rankings on TikTok and Bilibili. The Global Quality Score (GQS) and the modified DISCERN score were used to assess the quality of the information provided in these short videos.

RESULTS

A total of 186 short videos were included in this study; 56.5% of them were posted by health professionals, whereas 43.5% of them were posted by nonhealth professionals. The overall quality of these videos was unsatisfactory, with a median DISCERN score of 3 (2-4) and a median GQS of 3 (3-4). The radar maps showed that videos posted by gastroenterologists had higher completeness scores regarding outcomes, management, and risk factors, while nongastroenterologists had higher completeness scores concerning adverse effects, symptoms, and definitions of bowel preparation. Additionally, the median DISCERN score and GQS of the videos posted by gastroenterologists were 3 (3-4) and 3 (3-4), respectively, whereas the quality of the videos posted by patients was the worst, with a median DISCERN score of 2 (1-2) and a median GQS of 2 (1.25-3).

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, the overall quality of health information-related videos on bowel preparation before colonoscopy posted on specified short video platforms was not satisfactory. Gastroenterologists provide more information on the outcomes, management, and risk factors for bowel preparation before colonoscopy, while nongastroenterologists focus on adverse effects, symptoms, and definitions of bowel preparation.

摘要

背景

对于高质量的结肠镜检查,充分的肠道准备是前提,这与结肠镜检查的诊断准确性和治疗安全性密切相关。虽然科普短视频可以帮助人们快速获取健康信息,但作为结肠镜检查前肠道准备健康信息来源的短视频的整体质量尚不清楚。因此,我们拟通过在 TikTok 和 B 站检索并筛选排名靠前的 100 个短视频,进行一项横断面研究,以调查结肠镜检查前肠道准备信息的短视频质量。

方法

以“结肠镜检查”和“肠道准备”作为关键词,在 TikTok 和 B 站的综合排名中搜索并筛选前 100 个视频。采用全球质量评分(GQS)和改良的 DISCERN 评分来评估这些短视频提供的信息质量。

结果

本研究共纳入 186 个短视频,其中 56.5%由健康专业人士发布,43.5%由非健康专业人士发布。这些视频的整体质量不尽如人意,DISCERN 评分中位数为 3(2-4),GQS 中位数为 3(3-4)。雷达图显示,胃肠病学家发布的有关结局、处理和危险因素的视频在完整性方面得分更高,而非胃肠病学家在不良反应、症状和肠道准备定义方面的视频完整性得分更高。此外,胃肠病学家发布的视频的 DISCERN 评分中位数和 GQS 中位数分别为 3(3-4)和 3(3-4),而患者发布的视频质量最差,DISCERN 评分中位数为 2(1-2),GQS 中位数为 2(1.25-3)。

结论

总之,指定短视频平台上发布的与结肠镜检查前肠道准备相关的健康信息短视频的整体质量不尽人意。胃肠病学家提供更多关于结肠镜检查前肠道准备的结局、处理和危险因素的信息,而非胃肠病学家则更关注不良反应、症状和肠道准备定义。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0ddd/10896954/e7c926127ecd/fpubh-12-1309632-g004.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0ddd/10896954/b0015dc9a147/fpubh-12-1309632-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0ddd/10896954/4dcf628e4f52/fpubh-12-1309632-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0ddd/10896954/eb363578359d/fpubh-12-1309632-g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0ddd/10896954/e7c926127ecd/fpubh-12-1309632-g004.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0ddd/10896954/b0015dc9a147/fpubh-12-1309632-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0ddd/10896954/4dcf628e4f52/fpubh-12-1309632-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0ddd/10896954/eb363578359d/fpubh-12-1309632-g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0ddd/10896954/e7c926127ecd/fpubh-12-1309632-g004.jpg

相似文献

1
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.
2
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.
3
The quality and reliability of short videos about thyroid nodules on BiliBili and TikTok: Cross-sectional study.哔哩哔哩和抖音上关于甲状腺结节短视频的质量与可靠性:横断面研究
Digit Health. 2024 Oct 7;10:20552076241288831. doi: 10.1177/20552076241288831. eCollection 2024 Jan-Dec.
4
The status quo of short videos as a health information source of : a cross-sectional study.短视频作为健康信息来源的现状:一项横断面研究。
Front Public Health. 2024 Jan 8;11:1344212. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2023.1344212. eCollection 2023.
5
Short video platforms as sources of health information about cervical cancer: A content and quality analysis.短视频平台作为宫颈癌健康信息来源:内容和质量分析。
PLoS One. 2024 Mar 8;19(3):e0300180. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0300180. eCollection 2024.
6
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.
7
The status quo of short video as sources of health information on gastroesophageal reflux disease in China: a cross-sectional study.中国短视频作为胃食管反流病健康信息来源的现状:一项横断面研究。
Front Public Health. 2024 May 28;12:1400749. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2024.1400749. eCollection 2024.
8
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.
9
The Reliability and Quality of Short Videos as a Source of Dietary Guidance for Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Cross-sectional Study.短视频作为炎症性肠病饮食指导来源的可靠性和质量:横断面研究。
J Med Internet Res. 2023 Feb 9;25:e41518. doi: 10.2196/41518.
10
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.

本文引用的文献

1
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.
2
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.
3
Assessment of Accuracy, User Engagement, and Themes of Eating Disorder Content in Social Media Short Videos.
社交媒体短视频中饮食失调内容的准确性、用户参与度和主题评估。
JAMA Netw Open. 2023 Apr 3;6(4):e238897. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.8897.
4
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.
5
The Reliability and Quality of Short Videos as a Source of Dietary Guidance for Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Cross-sectional Study.短视频作为炎症性肠病饮食指导来源的可靠性和质量:横断面研究。
J Med Internet Res. 2023 Feb 9;25:e41518. doi: 10.2196/41518.
6
Health information sharing on social media: quality assessment of short videos about chronic kidney disease.社交媒体上的健康信息共享:关于慢性肾脏病短视频的质量评估。
BMC Nephrol. 2022 Nov 28;23(1):378. doi: 10.1186/s12882-022-03013-0.
7
Quality and accuracy of gastric cancer related videos in social media videos platforms.社交媒体视频平台中胃癌相关视频的质量和准确性。
BMC Public Health. 2022 Nov 5;22(1):2025. doi: 10.1186/s12889-022-14417-w.
8
Quality of Internet Videos Related to Pediatric Urology in Mainland China: A Cross-Sectional Study.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.
9
A randomized trial of comparing video telecare education vs. in-person education on dietary regimen compliance in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a support for clinical telehealth Providers.一项比较视频远程医疗教育与面对面教育对 2 型糖尿病患者饮食方案依从性影响的随机试验:为临床远程医疗服务提供者提供支持。
BMC Endocr Disord. 2022 May 2;22(1):116. doi: 10.1186/s12902-022-01032-4.
10
TikTok and Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder: A Cross-Sectional Study of Social Media Content Quality.TikTok 与注意力缺陷多动障碍:社交媒体内容质量的横断面研究。
Can J Psychiatry. 2022 Dec;67(12):899-906. doi: 10.1177/07067437221082854. Epub 2022 Feb 23.