In this work, we empirically evaluated expert-led debunking of health misinformation on TikTok with n=420 survey and n=20 interview participants. Unlike fact-checkers, health professionals debunk misinformation non-anonymously through video-against-video formats (stitching/”duetting”), rather than using labels. We analyzed 5,161 such posts to select six misinformation and six debunking videos across three common topics – two general health, two mental health, and two nutrition – for statistical comparison. Participants exposed to debunking videos believed misinformation claims significantly less than those exposed to misinformation videos in all six conditions. Experts were seen as more credible than misinformation creators, except in one instance involving mental health. Thematic analysis showed that expert-led debunking succeeded because experts’ videos aligned with the Debunking Handbook method for effective refutation. Experts’ credibility is derived mainly from being perceived as non-typical influencers who maintain reputable TikTok personas by providing qualified medical evidence and advice.

We describe the development of an admissions assessment supporting applications to engineering degree programmes at universities in the UK, Europe and South East Asia. The role of an admissions assessment and construct validity considerations for test development are discussed, drawing on a review of the skills needed for engineering degree programmes.