Table 3.
Categorization of videos about laryngeal carcinoma on YouTube/ Bilibili/ TikTok.
| Platform | YouTube (N1 = 98) | Bilibili (N2 = 74) | TikTok (N3 = 99) | P(Y-B) | P(B-T) | P(Y-T) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Originality, n (%) | 98 (100%) | 72 (97.3%) | 99 (100%) | 0.184d | - | 0.182d |
| Number of topics per video, Median [P25, P75] | 1.5 (1–2) | 3 (2–4) | 2 (2–3) | <0.001 a | 0.239a | <0.001 a |
| Type of topics, n (%) | ||||||
| Anatomy | 8 (8.4%) | 22 (29.7%) | 21 (21.1%) | <0.001 b | 0.164b | 0.010 b |
| Etiology/Prevention | 17 (17.3%) | 41 (55.4%) | 52 (52.5%) | <0.001 b | 0.567b | <0.001 b |
| Pathology | 7 (7.1%) | 37 (50%) | 55 (55.6%) | <0.001 b | 0.589b | <0.001 b |
| Epidemiology | 9 (9.2%) | 8 (10.8%) | 11 (11.1%) | 0.723b | 1.000b | 0.654b |
| Symptoms | 7 (7.1%) | 20 (27.0%) | 16 (16.1%) | <0.001 b | 0.066b | 0.049 b |
| Examinations/Diagnosis | 81 (82.7%) | 33 (44.6%) | 30 (30.3%) | <0.001 b | 0.038 b | <0.001 b |
| Treatment | 35 (35.7%) | 51 (68.9%) | 66 (66.7%) | <0.001 b | 0.563b | <0.001 b |
| Prognosis | 14 (14.3%) | 10 (13.5%) | 23 (23.2%) | 0.885b | 0.126b | 0.108b |
| TCM, n (%) | 0 | 30 (40.5%) | 17 (17.1%) | <0.001 b | <0.001 b | <0.001 b |
| Style of video shooting, n (%) | ||||||
| Solo narration | 29 (29.6%) | 49 (66.2%) | 74 (74.7%) | <0.001 b | 0.336b | <0.001 b |
| Q & A | 12 (12.3%) | 4 (5.4%) | 5 (5.1%) | 0.140b | 1.000c | 0.012b |
| PPT or Class | 40 (40.8%) | 6 (8.1%) | 2 (2.0%) | <0.001 b | 0.118c | <0.001 b |
| Animation / Action | 3 (3.1%) | 1 (1.4%) | 1 (1.0%) | 0.842c | 1.000d | 0.403c |
| Medical scenarios | 7 (7.1%) | 10 (13.5%) | 15 (15.2%) | 0.147b | 0.818b | 0.295b |
| TV programs/documentaries | 7 (7.1%) | 2 (2.7%) | 1 (1.0%) | 0.363c | 0.780c | 0.022 c |
| Other | 0 | 2 (2.7%) | 1 (1.0%) | 0.178d | 0.780c | 1.000d |
P(Y-B): YouTube versus Bilibili; P(B-T): Bilibili versus TikTok; P(Y-T): YouTube versus TikTok. Bold text means the p-value < 0.05.
a
Mann-Whitney U test.
b
Chi-squared test.
c
Continuity correction.
d
Fisher’s exact test.