Quality of Allergic Rhinitis Content Across Social Media Platforms

ABSTRACT Objectives To assess the quality and engagement of allergic rhinitis‐related short‐form content on social media. Methods A search across TikTok, Instagram Reels, Facebook Reels, and YouTube Shorts was conducted for allergic rhinitis‐related hashtags. Posts were categorized by content category, author, and popularity. Content was analyzed with the Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool for Audiovisual Material (PEMAT‐AV) to assess understandability, Global Quality Scale (GQS) to measure quality, and Accuracy in Digital‐health Information (ANDI) to measure accuracy. Videos were independently assessed by two reviewers per platform; a third reviewer resolved discrepancies. Results Four hundred and sixty videos were analyzed. Most (69.1%) were educational and authored by medical professionals (38.5%) or lay individuals (48.9%). YouTube had the greatest proportion of medical professional content (56.7%). Instagram scored highest for PEMAT understandability (72.0%) versus YouTube (70.9%), TikTok (61.1%), and Facebook (45.9%) ( p < 0.001). YouTube scored highest for PEMAT actionability (55.6%) versus Instagram (48.2%), TikTok (45.3%), and Facebook (35.4%) ( p < 0.001). YouTube had the highest average GQS (3.12) compared with Instagram (2.70), TikTok (2.21), and Facebook (2.09) ( p < 0.001). YouTube also had the highest average ANDI score (2.80) compared with Facebook (2.19), TikTok (1.91), and Instagram (1.68) ( p ≤ 0.026). On multivariable analysis, medical professionals were associated with greater GQS, ANDI, PEMAT understandability, and PEMAT actionability scores (all p < 0.001). Conclusions Among the platforms studied, Instagram and YouTube content just barely met the PEMAT understandability threshold (≥ 70%). However, none of the platforms on average contained adequately actionable or completely accurate content. YouTube Shorts host the greatest proportion of medical professional content and the highest‐quality content relative to other platforms. Level of Evidence 4.