Social media has become a daily source of connectivity, entertainment, and health information across all age groups. It has transformed how health knowledge is shared and consumed. Often, such content is delivered under the disclaimer “this post is not medical advice,” even as it implies otherwise. A lack of platform regulation allows individuals without medical training to share health-related information or personal experiences, often omitting context critical to patient understanding and safety. To increase engagement, even health care professionals–including dermatologists–have adapted their content into brief, attention-grabbing formats. This shift toward short-form, simplified videos often sacrifices educational depth, reducing complex topics to superficial overviews. The emphasis on visual appeal may further prioritize style over substance. Past studies evaluating social media health content often conclude that improved quality is essential for patient safety [1-3].

To assess the reliability of dermatologic information on Instagram, we analyzed the top 30 most-viewed videos under the hashtags #retinoid OR #retinol, each with over 50,000 views. There were no duplicate videos. The decision to include 30 videos was based on previous publications in the field that included a similar or smaller number of videos for their statistical analysis. Content creators were categorized as dermatologists, nondermatology physicians (other MDs/DOs), or laypeople. Videos were excluded if the creator’s qualifications could not be verified. Four independent reviewers with dermatology training scored each video using the DISCERN instrument, a validated tool for assessing consumer health information quality [4]. Because not all consumers read further into social media posts, we did not include captions, descriptions, and on-screen text in the DISCERN tool analysis. Median and mean scores for each group were calculated. A 1-way ANOVA was used to test for group differences, with post hoc Tukey analysis used for pairwise comparisons (significance set at P<.05).

The breakdown of videos was as follows: 10 dermatologist-created, 3 other physician–created, and 17 layperson-created. We found a significant difference in DISCERN scores by creator type (P=.04). Post hoc analysis showed dermatologist-created videos scored significantly higher than those by laypeople (P=.049). Differences between dermatologists and nondermatology professionals (P=.09) and between nondermatology professionals and laypeople (P=.98) were not significant. The intraclass correlation coefficient among reviewers was 0.958, indicating excellent concordance. Results are shown in Figure 1.