| Literature DB >> 3995690 |
Abstract
The coverage of whooping cough and its vaccine by the British press was content-analysed and compared with that of four other diseases for which articles were relatively common over the same time period. The results indicated that the topics were dealt with differently by the press, with whooping cough vaccination being seen as more risky than the others, requiring both medical advice and a decision before being accepted. The rather negative attitude to this vaccine emphasizes the problems associated with it rather than its preventive qualities. There was little evidence of a balanced discussion of the issues found in the medical literature, although accusations against the lay-press for providing largely inaccurate and sensationalized articles were found to be unsupported. The press were found, however, to publish many event-orientated articles, particularly those about specific individuals.Keywords: Empirical Approach; Health Care and Public Health
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 1985 PMID: 3995690 DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2214.1985.tb00446.x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Child Care Health Dev ISSN: 0305-1862 Impact factor: 2.508