Literature DB >> 24796314

A guide to reading health care news stories.

Gary Schwitzer1.   

Abstract

From April 16, 2006, through May 30, 2013, a team of reviewers from HealthNewsReview.org, many of whom were physicians, evaluated the reporting by US news organizations on new medical treatments, tests, products, and procedures. After reviewing 1889 stories (approximately 43% newspaper articles, 30% wire or news services stories, 15% online pieces [including those by broadcast and magazine companies], and 12% network television stories), the reviewers graded most stories unsatisfactory on 5 of 10 review criteria: costs, benefits, harms, quality of the evidence, and comparison of the new approach with alternatives. Drugs, medical devices, and other interventions were usually portrayed positively; potential harms were minimized, and costs were ignored. Our findings can help journalists improve their news stories and help physicians and the public better understand the strengths and weaknesses of news media coverage of medical and health topics.

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24796314     DOI: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2014.1359

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA Intern Med        ISSN: 2168-6106            Impact factor:   21.873


  17 in total

Review 1.  Engagement of the medical-technology sector with society.

Authors:  David Williams; Elazer R Edelman; Milica Radisic; Cato Laurencin; Darrel Untereker
Journal:  Sci Transl Med       Date:  2017-04-12       Impact factor: 17.956

2.  Interpreting Clinical Trial Outcomes for Optimal Patient Care: A Survey of Clinicians and Trainees.

Authors:  Tanner J Caverly; Daniel D Matlock; Allan V Prochazka; Brian P Lucas; Rodney A Hayward
Journal:  J Grad Med Educ       Date:  2016-02

Review 3.  Presentation of Benefits and Harms in US Cancer Screening and Prevention Guidelines: Systematic Review.

Authors:  Tanner J Caverly; Rodney A Hayward; Elyse Reamer; Brian J Zikmund-Fisher; Daniel Connochie; Michele Heisler; Angela Fagerlin
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2016-02-24       Impact factor: 13.506

4.  Breast Implant-Associated Anaplastic Large Cell Lymphoma: A Google Trends Analysis.

Authors:  Aishu Ramamurthi; Harsh Patel; Dhivya R Srinivasa
Journal:  Aesthetic Plast Surg       Date:  2022-04-19       Impact factor: 2.708

5.  Why Most Clinical Research Is Not Useful.

Authors:  John P A Ioannidis
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2016-06-21       Impact factor: 11.069

6.  Statins, news, and nuance.

Authors:  Gary Schwitzer
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2016-06-28

7.  Key Concepts for assessing claims about treatment effects and making well-informed treatment choices.

Authors:  Andrew David Oxman; Iain Chalmers; Astrid Austvoll-Dahlgren
Journal:  F1000Res       Date:  2018-11-12

8.  Three randomized controlled trials evaluating the impact of "spin" in health news stories reporting studies of pharmacologic treatments on patients'/caregivers' interpretation of treatment benefit.

Authors:  Isabelle Boutron; Romana Haneef; Amélie Yavchitz; Gabriel Baron; John Novack; Ivan Oransky; Gary Schwitzer; Philippe Ravaud
Journal:  BMC Med       Date:  2019-06-04       Impact factor: 8.775

9.  Who can you trust? A review of free online sources of "trustworthy" information about treatment effects for patients and the public.

Authors:  Andrew D Oxman; Elizabeth J Paulsen
Journal:  BMC Med Inform Decis Mak       Date:  2019-02-20       Impact factor: 2.796

10.  Development of a checklist for people communicating evidence-based information about the effects of healthcare interventions: a mixed methods study.

Authors:  Andrew D Oxman; Claire Glenton; Signe Flottorp; Simon Lewin; Sarah Rosenbaum; Atle Fretheim
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2020-07-21       Impact factor: 2.692

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.