Maintenance Notice

Due to necessary scheduled maintenance, the JMIR Publications website will be unavailable from Wednesday, July 01, 2020 at 8:00 PM to 10:00 PM EST. We apologize in advance for any inconvenience this may cause you.

Who will be affected?

Previously submitted to: JMIR Infodemiology (no longer under consideration since Apr 01, 2026)

Date Submitted: Dec 28, 2025
Open Peer Review Period: Jan 7, 2026 - Mar 4, 2026
(closed for review but you can still tweet)

NOTE: This is an unreviewed Preprint

Warning: This is a unreviewed preprint (What is a preprint?). Readers are warned that the document has not been peer-reviewed by expert/patient reviewers or an academic editor, may contain misleading claims, and is likely to undergo changes before final publication, if accepted, or may have been rejected/withdrawn (a note "no longer under consideration" will appear above).

Peer review me: Readers with interest and expertise are encouraged to sign up as peer-reviewer, if the paper is within an open peer-review period (in this case, a "Peer Review Me" button to sign up as reviewer is displayed above). All preprints currently open for review are listed here. Outside of the formal open peer-review period we encourage you to tweet about the preprint.

Citation: Please cite this preprint only for review purposes or for grant applications and CVs (if you are the author).

Final version: If our system detects a final peer-reviewed "version of record" (VoR) published in any journal, a link to that VoR will appear below. Readers are then encourage to cite the VoR instead of this preprint.

Settings: If you are the author, you can login and change the preprint display settings, but the preprint URL/DOI is supposed to be stable and citable, so it should not be removed once posted.

Submit: To post your own preprint, simply submit to any JMIR journal, and choose the appropriate settings to expose your submitted version as preprint.

Warning: This is an author submission that is not peer-reviewed or edited. Preprints - unless they show as "accepted" - should not be relied on to guide clinical practice or health-related behavior and should not be reported in news media as established information.

A Cross-Platform Analysis of Total Hip Arthroplasty Videos on Douyin and TikTok – Content Quality, Engagement, and Ecosystem Disparities

  • Shunyi Lei; 
  • Yanlong Qu; 
  • Fei Nan; 
  • Siyao Liu; 
  • Jin Yan; 
  • Wenhao Hao; 
  • Chaoyue Yu

ABSTRACT

Background:

Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA) is a common surgical procedure, and an increasing number of patients are turning to short-video platforms for information. Although Douyin and TikTok belong to the same parent company, they cater to distinct sociocultural environments.

Objective:

To compare the quality, content, and user engagement of THA-related videos, and to explore the different attitudes of medical professionals and patients on these two platforms.

Methods:

We systematically searched and analyzed 265 THA-related videos and 600 highly liked comments. Video quality was evaluated using the JAMA (Journal of the American Medical Association) benchmark, GQS (Global Quality Score), and DISCERN tools. The content and comment themes were categorized. Chi-square test with effect size analysis was used to compare categorical variables, while Mann–Whitney U test and Kruskal–Wallis H test were applied to compare differences in scores.

Results:

The majority of authors on Douyin were medical staff (97.71%), whereas on TikTok, the proportions of science communicators and patients/caregivers were higher (41.04% and 20.15%, respectively). There were significant differences in author backgrounds and content types between the two platforms (p<0.01). Douyin had higher median scores for JAMA and DISCERN (p<0.01), while no significant difference was found in GQS. Significant differences in comment sentiment and themes were observed across platforms, author identities, and content types (p<0.01). Conclusion: Despite technical similarities, Douyin and TikTok exhibit distinct ecosystems: Douyin maintains a doctor-centered, authority-driven model with higher content quality and greater user engagement; TikTok fosters a patient-centered, community-driven model that provides more abundant experience sharing.

Conclusions:

These differences reflect varying cultural attitudes toward medical authority and shared decision-making.


 Citation

Please cite as:

Lei S, Qu Y, Nan F, Liu S, Yan J, Hao W, Yu C

A Cross-Platform Analysis of Total Hip Arthroplasty Videos on Douyin and TikTok – Content Quality, Engagement, and Ecosystem Disparities

JMIR Preprints. 28/12/2025:90452

DOI: 10.2196/preprints.90452

URL: https://preprints.jmir.org/preprint/90452

Download PDF


Request queued. Please wait while the file is being generated. It may take some time.

© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.