Cited by 87Social Media in Health EducationHealth Literacy and Information AccessibilityAcademic Publishing and Open Access

Examining TikTok’s Potential for Community-Engaged Digital Knowledge Mobilization With Equity-Seeking Groups

Open access
MacKinnon, Kinnon Ross, Kia, Hannah, Lacombe-Duncan, Ashley·2021·Journal of Medical Internet Research

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Social media is increasingly being leveraged by researchers to engage in public debates and rapidly disseminate research results to health care providers, health care users, policy makers, educators, and the general public. This paper contributes to the growing literature on the use of social media for digital knowledge mobilization, drawing particular attention to TikTok and its unique potential for collaborative knowledge mobilization with underserved communities who experience barriers to health care and health inequities (eg, equity-seeking groups). Setting the TikTok platform apart from other social media are the unique audiovisual video editing tools, together with an impactful algorithm, that make knowledge dissemination and exchange with large global audiences possible. As an example, we will discuss digital knowledge mobilization with trans and nonbinary (trans) communities, a population that experiences barriers to health care and is engaged in significant peer-to-peer health information sharing on the web. To demonstrate, analytics data from 13 selected TikTok videos on the topic of research on gender-affirming medicine (eg, hormonal therapy and surgeries) are presented to illustrate how knowledge is disseminated within the trans community via TikTok. Considerations for researchers planning to use TikTok for digital knowledge mobilization and other related community engagement with equity-seeking groups are also discussed. These include the limitations of TikTok analytics data for measuring knowledge mobilization, population-specific concerns related to community safety on social media, the spread of disinformation, barriers to internet access, and commercialization and intellectual property issues. This paper concludes that TikTok is an innovative social media platform that presents possibilities for achieving transformative, community-engaged knowledge mobilization among researchers, underserved health care users, and their health care providers, all of whom are necessary to achieve better health care and population health outcomes.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2196/30315

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Over recent years, TikTok has exhibited a surge in contents regarding mental illness, body positivity, neurodiversity, and gender identity.

    “Over recent years, TikTok has exhibited a surge in contents regarding mental illness, body positivity, neurodiversity, and gender identity [38, 39].”

    From Scrolling through adolescence: a systematic review of the impact of TikTok on adolescent mental health (2025) · cites this paper as [39]

    The Community-Engaged Knowledge Mobilization and Trans Peer-to-Peer Information Sharing section describes TikTok content about trans identity and gender-affirming care. It does not document a surge over time or establish a comparable increase in content about mental illness, body positivity, or neurodiversity. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 49 · Cited by 87

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [50]Andalibi N Lacombe-Duncan A Roosevelt L Giniel C Wojciechowski K LGBTQ persons? use of online spaces to navigate conception, pregnancy, and pregnancy loss: an intersectional approach Transact Comput-Hum Interact (TOCHI) 2021 In Press (forthcoming)

Authors
MacKinnon, K. R., Kia, H., & Lacombe-Duncan, A.
Affiliations
  • York University (CA)
  • University of British Columbia (CA)
Corresponding author
MacKinnon, Kinnon Ross
Venue
Journal of Medical Internet Research
Published
2021-12-09
Volume
23
Issue
12
Pages
e30315
ISSN
1438-8871 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3210688059
Cited by
87
References
49
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 24 · 2024: 25 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 5
FWCI
6.91
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Journal of Medical Internet Research (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Health › Social Media in Health Education
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Literacy and Information Accessibility
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Academic Publishing and Open Access
Keywords
TikTok, community participation, social media health communication, health disparities, barriers to care, disinformation, internet access barriers, commercialization of research, intellectual property
MeSH terms
Disinformation, Health Inequities, Humans, Social Media

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review