Retinol Misinformation Is ‘Topical’ on Social Media: A Qualitative Analysis

Topical retinoids influence a range of cellular processes, including growth, differentiation and immune modulation [1]. Retinol, a widely accessible over-the-counter retinoid, is increasingly relevant due to impending European Union regulations limiting concentrations to 0.05% in body lotions and 0.3% in face and hand products [2]. Although non-prescription retinol products are less potent than prescription formulations, they are not without risks, including skin irritation and, in rare cases, hypervitaminosis A [3]. Despite these potential harms, retinol is often used without medical supervision. Social media platforms are becoming prominent sources of dermatologic information, particularly among adolescents [4]. We hypothesised that youth audiences are frequently exposed to and influenced by retinol-related content on social media. To evaluate the quality of this information, we conducted a cross-sectional qualitative analysis of the most popular retinol-related videos across TikTok, Instagram, and Facebook. On 2 February 2025, we identified the 50 most-liked or most-viewed retinol-related videos on each platform. Table 1 demonstrates a summary of our qualitative analysis findings. Videos were independently assessed using the validated 16-item DISCERN tool, which evaluates the quality of consumer health information, generating scores from 1 (very poor) to 5 (excellent). On TikTok, the top 50 videos received over 10.3 million likes and 66,850 comments. The mean DISCERN score was 2.18. Only 30% (15/50) were created by board-certified dermatologists, while 62% (31/50) were user-generated testimonials, often showing ‘before-and-after’ footage. Merely 18% (9/50) of videos addressed potential side effects such as irritation or interactions, and only 12% (6/50) mentioned correct application techniques. Instagram content was identified using the hashtag #retinol, which yielded approximately 1.2 million posts. Among the top 50 posts, 18% were authored by consultant dermatologists, 4% by plastic surgeons, 6% by aesthetic practitioners and smaller proportions by general practitioners and pharmacists. These posts collectively represented 11.6 million followers. The mean DISCERN score was 2.02, with significantly higher scores for content created by medical professionals (p = 0.03). On Facebook, the top 50 most-watched clips had a cumulative viewership of 247 million. Of these, 22% were produced by dermatologists and 4% by plastic surgeons. The remaining 58% (29/50) were user-generated videos documenting personal use. The mean DISCERN score was 2.20. While 66% (33/50) of videos mentioned side effects, only 10 included advice on proper application. None of the reviewed content addressed risks such as photosensitivity or emphasised that products should not be used without medical oversight, especially by adolescents. Across all platforms, the mean DISCERN score was 2.13, representing ‘poor’ information quality. A comparison between the quality, source and educational value of retinol-related content across all three social networks is found in graph form in Figure 1. Alarmingly, no video on any platform included a disclaimer cautioning younger audiences or advising physician consultation. This is particularly concerning given the susceptibility of adolescents to social media trends and the dermatologic risks associated with unsupervised retinol use, including irritant contact dermatitis, retinoid dermatitis and photosensitivity reactions. We urge clinicians, particularly dermatologists, to be aware of the significant and unregulated influence social media has on patient health behaviours. Content creation by healthcare professionals should be more proactive, ensuring accurate, age-appropriate education reaches these audiences. Additionally, clinicians should routinely enquire about non-prescribed topical regimens during adolescent consultations. Our findings underscore the urgent need for improved digital health literacy, targeted dermatologic education and stronger clinical engagement with social platforms where misinformation continues to thrive. B.N. conceived of the research idea. B.N. conducted research in this area. B.N., L.M. and L.P. reviewed subsequent drafts and approved of the final version. The authors have nothing to report. The authors have nothing to report. The authors declare no conflicts of interest. The data underlying this article will be shared on reasonable request to the corresponding author.