Can you trust Tiktok for nutrition advice? Study includes #Whatieatinaday

Can you trust Tiktok for nutrition advice? Study includes #Whatieatinaday

A deep dive into how Tiktok's algorithm amplifies engaging but misleading nutritional advice—while burying nutritionists' evidence-based content. What does this mean for the health of young people?

Many posts could not be rated for accuracy - 41% of Tiktok nutrition videos did not provide enough factual information to be classified as true or false, often because they were purely anecdotal.

In a study recently published in the journalNutrientsResearchers at the University of Sydney, Australia, assessed the performance of nutrition-related posts on a popular social media platform and categorized them based on engagement, quality and accuracy.

Their findings show that the platform prioritizes high levels of engagement or “virality” over content accuracy, leading to concerns about misinformation that can have serious negative impacts on the nutritional and health behaviors of adolescents and young adults. However, the study found that different levels of accuracy did not result in statistically significant differences in engagement metrics.

background

Financial ties were rarely disclosed. Over three-quarters of content creators failed to disclose sponsorships, affiliate links, or other financial incentives associated with the products they promoted.

Social media is becoming increasingly important as a source of nutrition and health information for younger people. Its popularity with this demographic makes it a critical tool for disseminating health information.

With over a billion monthly active users, 63% of users on the platform assessed in this research are aged 10 to 29, and its algorithms prioritize short and engaging video content rather than long-form or curated posts.

The nature of social media posts has heightened concerns about misinformation, which can spread quickly when an inaccurate post goes viral, particularly when a significant portion of the information related to nutrition and health is not uploaded by experts such as nutritionists or nutrition fields.

Biased, weight-normative, inaccurate, and other potentially harmful messaging may increase body dissatisfaction and disordered eating habits among young women and adolescents, who are more likely to rely on social media for health information. Additionally, low-income populations may experience greater exposure to misinformation due to the barrier to accessing professional medical care.

Previous research from other platforms suggests that misleading content influences adolescents' food preferences and increases the risk of becoming obese or adopting poor dietary habits. Understanding vulnerable age groups' exposure to weight loss or diet culture content from non-expert sources is key to combating misinformation on social media.

About the study

Recipes and meal ideas weren't necessarily helpful. While the food content was popular, half of these posts did not provide meaningful nutrition advice, making it difficult to assess accuracy.

In this study, the research team examined the engagement metrics, prevalence, and characteristics of nutrition posts uploaded on the social media platform from September 2023 to March 2024.

Relevant articles were identified using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Extensions for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-SCR) protocol. A pilot study was used to identify hashtags and the posts were accessed through new accounts to reduce bias due to the algorithm. The screening process identified 1054 relevant sites, of which 250 were randomly selected for analysis.

The research team gathered information about engagement by looking at how many times a post was liked, commented on, shared or saved, as well as the number of subscribers the associated content creators had. Details on nutritional relevance, language and accessibility of the post were also collected. Posts were divided into nine groups based on their nutrition focus and eight groups based on the type of content creator (with a category of “content farms,” identified as producing large volumes of low-quality content that leverage engagement algorithms).

The quality of the posts was determined based on criteria such as commitment (to assess the potential for misinformation), transparency (reliability and clarity of information), financial disclosure (whether sponsorship, advertising or affiliations involved in the delivery of the Discussion Guidelines (Destarian Food Directions) and the Discussion Guidelines, as in the Food Guidelines, and the Enlargement Guidelines), as in the Food Guidelines, and the Discussion Guidelines, and the Focus of the Food Guidelines), as in the Food policy, like The Australia guidelines, like the by Australian food guidelines were, rated, rated, rated. credentials).

Posts were classified as “completely accurate” versus “completely inaccurate” scored for accuracy and AD, where A indicated the strongest alignment with evidence. The dataset was then analyzed to generate descriptive statistics and compare inaccurate and accurate posts based on engagement.

Quality of diet-related Tiktok posts defined by the Social Media Evaluation checklist

Results

Healthcare professionals face an uphill battle. Despite the most accurate content, nutritionists and nutritionists only made up 9% of total posts, leaving most nutrition advice in the hands of influencers without formal training.

Health and wellness influencers made up 32% of posts, fitness-related content creators made up 18%, and lifestyle content creators or other creators not focused on health or nutrition made up 18%. In contrast, nutritionists, nutritionists, or other health professionals were represented in only 5% of dietitian positions and 4% of dietitian positions, making experienced content a minority.

In terms of content, approximately 34% of posts were related to weight loss, meal ideas, or recipes. In 32% of videos, influencers shared “What I eat in a day,” which the study identified as a primary source of mormative messaging and misinformation. Dietary supplements were discussed in 10% of sites, while diets that achieved specific goals were discussed in 7%.

In almost half of applicable posts, the creator used testimonials to promote their own business or product. Only 18% included transparent advertising and only 13% identified and disclosed sources of conflicts of interest. Approximately 63% of posts promoted stereotypical attitudes and 55% did not provide evidence-based information. Only 10% of agencies highlighted potential risks associated with the behaviors and products they promoted despite the potential for harm.

The research team found that 36% of the jobs were completely accurate, with 29% being mostly accurate. In contrast, 19% of posts contained highly inaccurate information and 18% were mostly inaccurate. Only 12% of posts received a grade of A, 12% received a grade of B, 20% received a grade of C and 15% received a grade of D; 41% could not be evaluated. Dietitians produced the most accurate posts, with 42% of their content rated as completely accurate.

Notably, mostly accurate and Class A posts had the highest engagement on average, but the differences in engagement metrics between accurate and inaccurate posts were not statistically significant. This suggests that Tiktok's algorithm doesn't necessarily favor accurate content over misleading content, however.

Distribution of nutrition topics in nutrition-related Tiktok posts by level of (A) accuracy and (b) Proof.

Conclusions

Social media platforms, including the platforms analyzed in this study, are primarily dominated by non-expert content creators. These creators, while popular, may present information that lacks scientific credibility.

The findings highlight an urgent need for stricter moderation of nutritional misinformation, particularly for outlets that promote extreme dieting, unmanageable weight loss claims, or products with undisclosed sponsorship.

Contributions from qualified professionals, especially on weight loss, need to receive more attention to minimize vulnerable groups such as young adults.

Regarding “What I eat in a day” videos have been highlighted as a major driver of misinformation and reinforcing unrealistic nutritional standards. This, coupled with the platform's lack of regulation over misleading content, suggests a need for more proactive interventions.

The study calls for policies that encourage platforms to verify health content creators' credentials and promote evidence-based nutritional guidance for viral but misleading content. Efforts are also needed to educate users about misinformation on social media to minimize the impact of exposure to misleading content.

Sources: