Frame that gene. A tool for analysing and classifying the communication of genetics to the public

Scientific clickbait: Examining media coverage and readability in genome-wide association research

In the present study, we analyzed a large corpus of English-language online media articles covering genome-wide association studies (GWAS), exemplifying the use of computational methods to study science communication in biological sciences. We analyzed trends in media coverage, readability, themes, and mentions of ethical and social issues, in over 5,000 websites published from 2005 to 2018 from 3,555 GWAS publications on 1,943 different traits, identified via GWAS Catalog using a text-mining approach to inform the discussion about genetic literacy and media coverage. We found that 22.9% of GWAS papers received media attention but most were described in language too complex to be understood by the public. Ethical issues are rarely mentioned and mentions of translation are increasing over time. We predicted media attention based on year of publication, number of genetic associations identified, study sample size, and journal impact factor, using a regression model (r2 = 38.7%). We found that chronotype, educational attainment, alcohol and coffee consumption, sexual orientation, tanning, and hair color received substantially more attention than predicted by the regression model. We also evaluated the prevalence of the clickbait "one gene, one disease" headlines (e.g., "Scientists Say They've Found Gene That Causes Breast Cancer") and found that it is declining. In sum, online media coverage of GWAS should be more accessible, introduce more modern genetics terms, and when appropriate, ELSI should be mentioned. Science communication research can benefit from big data and text-mining techniques which allow us to study trends and changes in coverage trends across thousands of media outlets. Results can be explored interactively in a website we have built for this manuscript: https://jjmorosoli.shinyapps.io/newas/.

The Nine Cancer Frames: A Tool to Facilitate Critical Reading of Cancer-Related Information

People's ability to critically assess cancer-related information is essential from a preventional and therapeutic, as well as a general democratic perspective. Such cancer literacy is not just about acquiring factual knowledge. It also involves the ability to analyze how the information is contextualized-how cancer is framed. Previous research concerning the framing of cancer in public discourse is voluminous and penetrating but also fragmented and inaccessible to non-experts. In this study, we have developed an integrated and applicable tool for analyzing cancer discourse by systematically classifying distinctive ways of framing of the concept of cancer. Building on previous research and an inductive framing analysis of a broad range of public cancer discourse, systematically selected from British and Norwegian newspapers, we have characterized nine cancer frames: the biomedical, the environmental, the epidemiological, the personal, the sociopolitical, the economic, the antagonistic, the alternative, and the symbolic frame. This framing scheme may be applied to analyze cancer-related discourse across a plurality of themes and contexts. We also show how different frames combine to produce more complex messages, thereby revealing underlying patterns, strategies, and conflicts in cancer communication. In conclusion, this analytical tool enables critical reading of cancer-related information and may be especially useful in educational initiatives to advance health communication and public understanding of cancer.

Underdetermination and evidence-based policy

Safety assessment of technologies and interventions is often underdetermined by evidence. For example, scientists have collected evidence concerning genetically modified plants for decades. This evidence was used to ground opposing safety protocols for "stacked genetically modified" plants, in which two or more genetically modified plants are combined. Evidence based policy would thus be rendered more effective by an approach that accounts for underdetermination. Douglas (2012) proposes an explanatory approach, based on the criteria of transparency, empirical competence, internal consistency of explanations, and predictive potency. However, sometimes multiple explanations can satisfy these criteria. We propose an additional criterion based on converse abduction, where explanations are selected on the basis of ontological background assumptions as well as by evidence. We then apply our proposed scheme to the case of the regulation of stacked genetically modified plants. We discuss the implications and suggest follow-up work concerning the generalizability of the approach.

Genetic counseling in an indigenous Filipino community with a high prevalence of A2ML1-related otitis media

In this report, we describe the knowledge and beliefs on causes and management of otitis media of an indigenous Filipino community with a high prevalence of otitis media that is associated with an A2ML1 variant. Community lectures and individual genetic counseling were provided as intervention. Knowledge, beliefs, and health care-seeking behavior pertaining to otitis media were assessed pre- and post-genetic counseling. Twenty-five heads of households were interviewed. Beliefs regarding etiology of ear discharge varied widely, with swimming in the sea as the most commonly cited cause of ear discharge. During the post-counseling session, poor personal hygiene, dirty environment, and familial inheritance were mentioned as risk factors for otitis media or ear discharge. Knowledge about the genotypes for the A2ML1 variant and otitis media diagnoses within the household influenced beliefs on the role of hygiene and genetic susceptibility to otitis media and attitudes towards health care-seeking behavior. Genetic counseling was associated with variable improvement in knowledge on otitis media and in their understanding of genetic susceptibility to otitis media due to the A2ML1 variant. Language barriers, literacy level, cultural factors, and the complex nature of genetic information made genetic counseling in the particular population a challenge. Insights drawn from this experience recommend follow-up visits in the community.

How biological background assumptions influence scientific risk evaluation of stacked genetically modified plants: an analysis of research hypotheses and argumentations

Scientific risk evaluations are constructed by specific evidence, value judgements and biological background assumptions. The latter are the framework-setting suppositions we apply in order to understand some new phenomenon. That background assumptions co-determine choice of methodology, data interpretation, and choice of relevant evidence is an uncontroversial claim in modern basic science. Furthermore, it is commonly accepted that, unless explicated, disagreements in background assumptions can lead to misunderstanding as well as miscommunication. Here, we extend the discussion on background assumptions from basic science to the debate over genetically modified (GM) plants risk assessment. In this realm, while the different political, social and economic values are often mentioned, the identity and role of background assumptions at play are rarely examined. We use an example from the debate over risk assessment of stacked genetically modified plants (GM stacks), obtained by applying conventional breeding techniques to GM plants. There are two main regulatory practices of GM stacks: (i) regulate as conventional hybrids and (ii) regulate as new GM plants. We analyzed eight papers representative of these positions and found that, in all cases, additional premises are needed to reach the stated conclusions. We suggest that these premises play the role of biological background assumptions and argue that the most effective way toward a unified framework for risk analysis and regulation of GM stacks is by explicating and examining the biological background assumptions of each position. Once explicated, it is possible to either evaluate which background assumptions best reflect contemporary biological knowledge, or to apply Douglas' 'inductive risk' argument.

Ethical, social, and personal implications of extended human lifespan identified by members of the public

There are a number of ethical, social, and personal implications generated by the potential development and use of technologies that may extend human longevity by intervening in aging. Despite speculations about likely public attitudes toward life extension, to date there have been few attempts to empirically examine the public's perspective of these issues. Using open-ended survey questions via telephone interviews, this study explored the attitudes of 605 members of the Australian public toward the implications of life extension. Participants were asked to briefly describe in their own words what they believed would be the beneficial, as well as negative, implications arising from life extension (if there were any), both for themselves personally and for society as a whole. Participants were also asked to describe any ethical concerns they had about life extension, if they had any at all. All open-ended responses were collated and then underwent a thematic analysis to uncover commonly cited issues regarding personal benefits/negatives, societal benefits/negatives, and ethical concerns. A considerable number of participants envisioned at least some beneficial as well as negative implications for themselves and for society, and many claimed to have at least some ethical concerns. Some novel issues were raised as well as a number of those discussed within the bioethical literature. The results should encourage researchers, bioethicists, and policy makers to engage with members of the public about the goals of research surrounding life extension, the expected outcomes of such research, and the likely implications for individuals and society.