Literature DB >> 27778227

High tech or high risk? An analysis of media reports about robotic surgery.

Zita Ficko1, Kevin Koo2, Elias S Hyams2.   

Abstract

Robotic surgery continues to increase in popularity and prevalence. The adoption of robotic technology has generated controversy and frequent media coverage. We evaluate recent reports of surgical robotics in the lay press to characterize its objectivity. LexisNexis and Factiva consumer news databases were queried for articles pertaining to robotic surgery published during 2010-2015 in the three highest circulation national (US) newspapers as well as New England regional newspapers. Two independent reviewers performed content analysis and assessed headline bias with strong reliability (mean κ = 0.96). 82 articles met inclusion criteria. Urological and gynecologic procedures were the most cited (54 and 57%, respectively). Commonly discussed aspects of robotic surgery included increased cost (45 articles, 55%), increased complications (38 articles, 43%), and easier recovery (32 articles, 39%). A minority of headlines (45%) had a neutral or unbiased tone. National newspapers were significantly more likely to report robotic surgery unfavorably by discussing disadvantages of the technology, only quoting surgeons with negative opinions, or citing scientific studies discrediting the robot (all p < 0.05). Of the 27 news articles that referenced published research studies, all 27 quoted studies reported the disadvantages of robotic surgery, while only 7 (26%) cited findings favoring robotic approaches. News reports about robotic surgery in the popular press contain a high proportion of negative bias. Non-neutral headlines and emphasis on research unfavorable to robotics were common. Clinicians should be aware of these reporting biases, which may affect patients' perceptions of robotic surgery.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Media; Robotic surgery; Robotics

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27778227     DOI: 10.1007/s11701-016-0647-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Robot Surg        ISSN: 1863-2483


  16 in total

1.  Robotic surgery claims on United States hospital websites.

Authors:  Linda X Jin; Andrew M Ibrahim; Naeem A Newman; Danil V Makarov; Peter J Pronovost; Martin A Makary
Journal:  J Healthc Qual       Date:  2011-05-17       Impact factor: 1.095

2.  Comparative hospital cost-analysis of open and robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Jeffrey J Tomaszewski; Jarred C Matchett; Benjamin J Davies; Stephen V Jackman; Ronald L Hrebinko; Joel B Nelson
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2012-05-16       Impact factor: 2.649

3.  A randomized trial comparing conventional and robotically assisted total laparoscopic hysterectomy.

Authors:  Marie Fidela R Paraiso; Beri Ridgeway; Amy J Park; J Eric Jelovsek; Matthew D Barber; Tommaso Falcone; Jon I Einarsson
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2013-02-08       Impact factor: 8.661

4.  Use of advanced treatment technologies among men at low risk of dying from prostate cancer.

Authors:  Bruce L Jacobs; Yun Zhang; Florian R Schroeck; Ted A Skolarus; John T Wei; James E Montie; Scott M Gilbert; Seth A Strope; Rodney L Dunn; David C Miller; Brent K Hollenbeck
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2013-06-26       Impact factor: 56.272

5.  Reporting research in medical journals and newspapers.

Authors:  V Entwistle
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1995-04-08

6.  Comparative effectiveness of robotically assisted compared with laparoscopic adnexal surgery for benign gynecologic disease.

Authors:  Jason D Wright; Alessandra Kostolias; Cande V Ananth; William M Burke; Ana I Tergas; Eri Prendergast; Scott D Ramsey; Alfred I Neugut; Dawn L Hershman
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2014-11       Impact factor: 7.661

7.  Robotically assisted vs laparoscopic hysterectomy among women with benign gynecologic disease.

Authors:  Jason D Wright; Cande V Ananth; Sharyn N Lewin; William M Burke; Yu-Shiang Lu; Alfred I Neugut; Thomas J Herzog; Dawn L Hershman
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2013-02-20       Impact factor: 56.272

8.  Comparative effectiveness of minimally invasive vs open radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Jim C Hu; Xiangmei Gu; Stuart R Lipsitz; Michael J Barry; Anthony V D'Amico; Aaron C Weinberg; Nancy L Keating
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2009-10-14       Impact factor: 56.272

9.  Underreporting of robotic surgery complications.

Authors:  Michol A Cooper; Andrew Ibrahim; Heather Lyu; Martin A Makary
Journal:  J Healthc Qual       Date:  2015 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 1.095

10.  Overall care cost comparison between robotic and laparoscopic surgery for endometrial and cervical cancer.

Authors:  H Desille-Gbaguidi; T Hebert; J Paternotte-Villemagne; C Gaborit; E Rush; G Body
Journal:  Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol       Date:  2013-09-29       Impact factor: 2.435

View more
  5 in total

1.  Media reporting of ProtecT: a disconnect in information dissemination?

Authors:  M E Westerman; B Bhindi; R Choo; M T Gettman; R J Karnes; L Klotz; S A Boorjian
Journal:  Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis       Date:  2017-05-02       Impact factor: 5.554

Review 2.  Introducing new technology safely into urological practice.

Authors:  Siska Van Bruwaene; Benjamin Namdarian; Ben Challacombe; Ben Eddy; Ignace Billiet
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2018-01-11       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 3.  Patient positioning during minimally invasive surgery: what is current best practice?

Authors:  Jacqueline M Zillioux; Tracey L Krupski
Journal:  Robot Surg       Date:  2017-07-14

4.  Out of the Lab and Into the World: Analyses of Social Roles and Gender in Profiles of Scientists in The New York Times and The Scientist.

Authors:  Tessa M Benson-Greenwald; Mansi P Joshi; Amanda B Diekman
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2022-01-13

5.  Understanding the surgeon's behaviour during robot-assisted surgery: protocol for the qualitative Behav'Robot study.

Authors:  Clément Cormi; Guillaume Parpex; Camille Julio; Fiona Ecarnot; David Laplanche; Geoffrey Vannieuwenhuyse; Antoine Duclos; Stéphane Sanchez
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2022-04-07       Impact factor: 2.692

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.