This study aimed to systematically assess the informational reliability, quality, and educational suitability of videos introducing scoliosis exercises on TikTok. We retrieved and screened 1904 TikTok videos with the hashtags: “#scoliosis”, “#scoliosisexercise”, and “#scoliosistips”, before collecting a final sample of 171 scoliosis exercises in March 2022. Then, two independent raters assessed the reliability and quality of the videos using the DISCERN instrument and evaluated the educational suitability of the information using “Scoliosis Exercise Education Score” (SEES; exercise cycle, target, effect, precaution, and rationale). None of the videos were rated as excellent or good according to DISCERN. The mean SEES score was 2.02 out of 5. Videos uploaded by health organizations had significantly lower DISCERN and SEES scores than those by general users and healthcare professionals. Regarding the propriety of physiotherapeutic scoliosis-specific exercises (PSSE), DISCERN and SEES scores were significantly higher in the PSSE proper group than in the PSSE non-proper group. Although TikTok has become a popular source of scoliosis-related information, the overall information quality, reliability, and educational suitability of videos on scoliosis exercises in TikTok appear to be low, suggesting that TikTok is not suitable source for obtaining scoliosis exercise information.

BACKGROUND: The use of YouTube for providing medical information is increasing, and patients with COPD are likely to use digital media to obtain information for their conditions. This study aimed to analyze the reliability and quality of the videos that were most frequently viewed by patients with COPD who searched YouTube for information on pulmonary rehabilitation. METHODS: A YouTube search was conducted by using the keyword “pulmonary rehabilitation.” All the videos were categorized into 2 groups according to source and purpose. For evaluating the reliability and quality, the modified DISCERN score and the pulmonary rehabilitation for COPD-specific score (PRSS) were used, respectively. Differences of the variables between the groups and associations across the groups were examined. The influence of the variables of the videos on the engagement of viewers and viewership was analyzed. RESULTS: In total, 62 videos were analyzed. Most of the videos (54/62 [87%]) were uploaded by professionals and the remainder (8/62 [13%] by non-professionals. According to their purposes, 35 of 62 (56%) were informational and 27 of 62 (44%) were non-informational. The mean ± SD modified DISCERN score and the mean ± SD total the PRSS were 3.76 ± 1.04 and 4.13 ± 3.73, respectively. When comparing the videos according to professionalism, significant differences only in the modified DISCERN scores were observed. The engagement of viewers, viewership, mean modified DISCERN, mean total of the PRSS were significantly higher in the informational group than in the non-informational group. Video duration was positively correlated with engagement of viewers and viewership. CONCLUSIONS: Popular YouTube videos on pulmonary rehabilitation for COPD were reliable; however, they were biased and of low quality in terms of providing content. Given YouTube’s advantage of easy accessibility and disadvantage of vulnerability to poor-quality information, professionals should pay more attention to uploading comprehensive high-quality videos for informational purposes.

Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the presentation suitability and readability of ChatGPT’s responses to common patient questions, as well as its potential to enhance readability. Methods: We initially analyzed 30 ChatGPT responses related to knee osteoarthritis (OA) on March 20, 2023, using readability and presentation suitability metrics. Subsequently, we assessed the impact of detailed and simplified instructions provided to ChatGPT for same responses, focusing on readability improvement. Results: The readability scores for responses related to knee OA significantly exceeded the recommended sixth-grade reading level ( p < .001). While the presentation of information was rated as “adequate,” the content lacked high-quality, reliable details. After the intervention, readability improved slightly for responses related to knee OA; however, there was no significant difference in readability between the groups receiving detailed versus simplified instructions. Conclusions: Although ChatGPT provides informative responses, they are often difficult to read and lack sufficient quality. Current capabilities do not effectively simplify medical information for the general public. Technological advancements are needed to improve user-friendliness and practical utility.

We aimed to assess the quality and reliability of pressure injury‐related videos uploaded on YouTube, analyse the sources and contents, and examine the correlation between video parameters. We searched YouTube using two keywords, “pressure ulcer” and “pressure sore”, on August 20, 2022. We sorted the videos according to their number of views and included the top 100 videos for each keyword. The quality of videos was assessed using the Global Quality Scale (GQS), while their reliability was evaluated by the modified DISCERN (mDISCERN) tool. In addition, we evaluated the videos in which content was included, analysed the correlations and differences between GQS, mDISCERN, and video parameters. We initially found a total of 100 videos for each keyword and finally included and analysed 77 videos. The mean scores for the mDISCERN and GQS were 2.35 ± 0.98 and 3.09 ± 0.99, respectively. Both GQS and mDISCERN showed statistically significant correlations with each other (rho = 0.54, p < 0.0001*) and with the length of the videos, respectively (rho = 0.36, p = 0.001*), (rho = 0.29, p = 0.01*). Of the videos created by physicians, 8 (57.1%) included content related to treatment, while of the videos created by nonphysician health personnel, 22 (57.9%) included content related to prevention. Analysing whether there were differences in video parameters based on the sources, we observed significant differences between sources in GQS (p < 0.0001*), mDISCERN (p < 0.0001*), and video length (p = 0.001*). In the post‐hoc analysis, videos uploaded by physicians or nonphysician health personnel showed higher quality and reliability than videos uploaded by other sources. Therefore, the results of this study could be useful for healthcare providers, as well as patients and caregivers, to search for high‐quality and reliable YouTube videos related to pressure injury.