TikTok has more than 1.5 billion users globally. Health and wellness content on the application increased by more than 600% in 2021. This systematic review seeks to summarize which fields within medicine have embraced researching health communication on the TikTok platform and the most common measures reported within this literature. Research questions include what categories of health topics on TikTok are investigated in the literature, trends in topics by year, and types of outcomes reported. Embase, CINAHL, Scopus, and Ovid MEDLINE databases were searched in March 2024. Eligible studies met four criteria: (1) investigated human health topics on TikTok; (2) conducted in the United States; (3) published in English; and (4) published in a peer-reviewed journal. Of the 101 included studies, 50.5% (N = 51) discussed non-surgical specialties, 9.9% (N = 10) discussed topics within surgery, and 11.9% (N = 12) discussed COVID-19. The number of papers referencing non-surgical topics spiked in 2023, and no increase was seen in the number of COVID-19 papers over time. Most papers reported a number of interactions, and papers about mental health were least likely to report accuracy. Our findings highlight several health topics with a wide breadth of research dedicated to them, such as dermatology and COVID-19, and highlight areas for future research, such as the intersection of cancer and TikTok. Findings may be influential in the fields of medicine and healthcare research by informing health policy and targeted prevention efforts. This review reveals the need for future policies that focus on the role and expectations of the healthcare worker in health communication on social media. Implications for clinical practice include the need for providers to consider an individual’s perception of health and illness, given the wide variety of information available on social media applications such as TikTok. This review was pre-registered on PROSPERO (CRD42024529182).

Climate change is a threat affecting public health and healthcare systems, and the health sector accounts for nearly 10% of greenhouse gas emissions (GHGEs) in the United States, including through food services. Reducing meat consumption in healthcare institutions presents solutions to reduce food-related GHGEs and provide health benefits to patients. However, challenges in quantifying these benefits present barriers for implementation. We aimed to use publicly available tools to quantify the magnitude of climate, economic, and health benefits associated with integrating a plant-based protein “swap” of current menu options at one hospital institution. On average, modeled plant-based protein swaps cost $0.159/ounce less, reduce trans fats (0.102 g/ounce) and cholesterol (19.0 mg/ounce), and decrease 721 g of CO₂/ounce compared to meat-based counterparts. However, the swap analysis yielded variable results on meal protein content and caloric intake that require additional consideration. If plant-based alternatives were implemented across half of the inpatient dining service at this institution, equivalent to 206,000 meals annually, there could be a potential annual value of $920,240 in food cost savings and $973,028 in avoided GHGEs. Healthcare decision-makers can leverage publicly available tools to implement evidence-based climate change mitigation solutions, helping hospitals battle climate change and reduce the burden of chronic disease.