Scholarlink

Background <p>Following the 2023 extension of HPV vaccine eligibility (9–45 years) in China, public demand for HPV-related health information has surged, with Bilibili (a long-form knowledge platform) and TikTok (a short-form high-engagement platform) emerging as core sources. This study aimed to compare uploader characteristics, content features, information quality, and the correlation between audience engagement and quality of HPV-related videos on the two platforms.</p> Methods <p>On August 8, 2025, we retrieved the top 100 videos from each platform using three search terms: “HPV vaccine”, “human papillomavirus infection”, and “cervical cancer screening”. Prior to retrieval, user accounts were logged out and browsing histories cleared to avoid personalized recommendation biases, with results displayed in the platforms’ default comprehensive ranking. After excluding irrelevant, duplicate, silent, and advertisement videos (as well as those published &lt; 7 days), 197 valid samples were analyzed. Quality was evaluated via the Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT), Global Quality Score (GQS), and a customized HPV-specific checklist. Statistical analyses were performed using IBM SPSS Version 30.0, including nonparametric tests, correlation analysis, and regression models as appropriate. A two-tailed <i>p</i> &lt; 0.05 was considered statistically significant.</p> Results <p>TikTok videos were significantly shorter (median: 53s vs. 278s, <i>p</i> &lt; 0.01) and had higher audience engagement (median likes: 6011 vs. 420.5, <i>p</i> &lt; 0.01) than Bilibili videos. Bilibili outperformed TikTok across 11 key quality metrics (e.g., PEMAT-Total: 1.0 vs. 0.84, <i>p</i> &lt; 0.01), with TikTok showing a lack of preventive information (median score = 0) and 32% of non-professional uploaders’ videos on Bilibili failing to clarify HPV 16/18-cervical cancer associations. Audience engagement was positively correlated with quality on Bilibili (<i>r</i> = 0.25–0.31, <i>p</i> &lt; 0.05) but not on TikTok. No significant quality differences were observed between professional and non-professional uploaders on either platform (all <i>p</i> &gt; 0.05).</p> Conclusion <p>TikTok serves as an effective channel for introductory HPV science communication, while Bilibili is better suited for systematic knowledge acquisition. To enhance public health impact, platforms, creators, and regulators should collaborate: TikTok should establish quality thresholds for short-form health content, and Bilibili should further enhance the depth of professional HPV content.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Bilibili/TikTok videos as sources of HPV-related medical information: a cross-sectional content analysis

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年3月9日

查看全文
  • Zhaohui Jiang,
  • Yanjiao Hua,
  • Shupei Xu,
  • Mengjie Li,
  • Li Deng

摘要

Background

Following the 2023 extension of HPV vaccine eligibility (9–45 years) in China, public demand for HPV-related health information has surged, with Bilibili (a long-form knowledge platform) and TikTok (a short-form high-engagement platform) emerging as core sources. This study aimed to compare uploader characteristics, content features, information quality, and the correlation between audience engagement and quality of HPV-related videos on the two platforms.

Methods

On August 8, 2025, we retrieved the top 100 videos from each platform using three search terms: “HPV vaccine”, “human papillomavirus infection”, and “cervical cancer screening”. Prior to retrieval, user accounts were logged out and browsing histories cleared to avoid personalized recommendation biases, with results displayed in the platforms’ default comprehensive ranking. After excluding irrelevant, duplicate, silent, and advertisement videos (as well as those published < 7 days), 197 valid samples were analyzed. Quality was evaluated via the Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT), Global Quality Score (GQS), and a customized HPV-specific checklist. Statistical analyses were performed using IBM SPSS Version 30.0, including nonparametric tests, correlation analysis, and regression models as appropriate. A two-tailed p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

TikTok videos were significantly shorter (median: 53s vs. 278s, p < 0.01) and had higher audience engagement (median likes: 6011 vs. 420.5, p < 0.01) than Bilibili videos. Bilibili outperformed TikTok across 11 key quality metrics (e.g., PEMAT-Total: 1.0 vs. 0.84, p < 0.01), with TikTok showing a lack of preventive information (median score = 0) and 32% of non-professional uploaders’ videos on Bilibili failing to clarify HPV 16/18-cervical cancer associations. Audience engagement was positively correlated with quality on Bilibili (r = 0.25–0.31, p < 0.05) but not on TikTok. No significant quality differences were observed between professional and non-professional uploaders on either platform (all p > 0.05).

Conclusion

TikTok serves as an effective channel for introductory HPV science communication, while Bilibili is better suited for systematic knowledge acquisition. To enhance public health impact, platforms, creators, and regulators should collaborate: TikTok should establish quality thresholds for short-form health content, and Bilibili should further enhance the depth of professional HPV content.