Sources and coverage of medical news on front pages of US newspapers

What cancer research makes the news? A quantitative analysis of online news stories that mention cancer studies

Journalists’ health and science reporting aid the public’s direct access to research through the inclusion of hyperlinks leading to original studies in peer-reviewed journals. While this effort supports the US-government mandate that research be made widely available, little is known about what research journalists share with the public. This cross-sectional exploratory study characterises US-government-funded research on cancer that appeared most frequently in news coverage and how that coverage varied by cancer type, disease incidence and mortality rates. The subject of analysis was 11436 research articles (published in 2016) on cancer funded by the US government and 642 news stories mentioning at least one of these articles. Based on Altmetric data, researchers identified articles via PubMed and characterised each based on the news media attention received online. Only 1.88% (n = 213) of research articles mentioning US government-funded cancer research included at least one mention in an online news publication. This is in contrast to previous research that found 16.8% (n = 1925) of articles received mention by online mass media publications. Of the 13 most common cancers in the US, 12 were the subject of at least one news mention; only urinary and bladder cancer received no mention. Traditional news sources included significantly more mentions of research on common cancers than digital native news sources. However, a general discrepancy exists between cancers prominent in news sources and those with the highest mortality rate. For instance, lung cancer accounted for the most deaths annually, while melanoma led to 56% less annual deaths; however, journalists cited research regarding these cancers nearly equally. Additionally, breast cancer received the greatest coverage per estimated annual death, while pancreatic cancer received the least coverage per death. Findings demonstrated a continued misalignment between prevalent cancers and cancers mentioned in online news media. Additionally, cancer control and prevention received less coverage from journalists than other cancer continuum stages, highlighting a continued underrepresentation of prevention-focused research. Results revealed a need for further scholarship regarding the role of journalists in research dissemination.

Radiology in the News: A Content Analysis of Radiology-Related Information Retrieved From Google Alerts

•

Google Alerts highlighted a diverse set of topics present in online media.

•

Most links were directly to non-radiology lay press, but <1% of links over the 6-month period sent the user directly to a primary peer-reviewed medical journal article.

•

The most common topics were market trends, promotional, COVID-19, and artificial intelligence.

Introduction

Radiology topics receive substantial online media attention, with prior studies focusing on social media platform coverage. We used Google Alerts, a content change detection and notification service, to prospectively analyze new radiology-related content appearing on the internet.

Materials and Methods

An automated notification was created on Google Alerts for the search term “radiology,” sending the user emails with up to 3 new links daily. All links from November 2019 through April 2020 were assessed by 2 of 3 independent raters using a coding system to classify the content source and primary topic of discussion. The top 5 primary topics were retrospectively evaluated to identify prevalent subcategories. Content viewing restrictions were documented.

Results

526 links were accessed. The majority (68%) of links were created by non-radiology lay press, followed by radiology-related lay press (28%), university-based publications (2%), and professional society websites (2%). The primary topic of these links most frequently related to market trends (28%), promotional material (20%), COVID-19 (13%), artificial intelligence (8%), and new technology or equipment (5%). 15% of links discussed a topic sourced from another article, such as a peer-reviewed journal, though only 2 linked directly to the journal itself. 8% of links had content viewing restrictions.

Conclusion

New radiology content was largely disseminated via non-radiology news sources; radiologists should therefore ensure their research and viewpoints are presented in these outlets. Google Alerts may be a useful tool to stay abreast of the most current public radiology subject matters, especially during these times of social isolation and rapidly evolving clinical practice.

Against conventional wisdom: when the public, the media, and medical practice collide

BACKGROUND

In 2009, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force released new mammography screening guidelines that sparked a torrent of criticism. The subsequent conflict was significant and pitted the Task Force against other health organizations, advocacy groups, the media, and the public at large. We argue that this controversy was driven by the systematic removal of uncertainty from science communication. To increase comprehension and adherence, health information communicators remove caveats, limitations, and hedging so science appears simple and more certain. This streamlining process is, in many instances, initiated by researchers as they engage in dissemination of their findings, and it is facilitated by public relations professionals, journalists, public health practitioners, and others whose tasks involve using the results from research for specific purposes.

ANALYSIS

Uncertainty is removed from public communication because many communicators believe that it is difficult for people to process and/or that it is something the audience wants to avoid. Uncertainty management theory posits that people can find meaning and value in uncertainty. We define key terms relevant to uncertainty management, describe research on the processing of uncertainty, identify directions for future research, and offer recommendations for scientists, practitioners, and media professionals confronted with uncertain findings.

CONCLUSIONS

Science is routinely simplified as it is prepared for public consumption. In line with the model of information overload, this practice may increase short-term adherence to recommendations at the expense of long-term message consistency and trust in science.

Portrayal of complementary and alternative medicine for cancer by top online news sites

BACKGROUND

Medical research news provided through the World Wide Web is easily accessible to the general public. Thus, it is necessary to understand how research findings released from online news sources are portrayed.

METHODS

The sample includes articles (n=205) published between January 1, 2010 and June 18, 2010 in top online news sites with competitive traffic rankings in the United States as determined by Alexa.com. Google Reader was used to find health-related news articles corresponding to the relevant news sources. Data analysis was performed using SPSS with two-tailed significance values of the χ(2) statistic.

RESULTS

A content analysis (n=205 stories) revealed that the majority of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) modalities for cancer discussed in top online news sources are classified as nutritional therapeutics, and the cancer topic that appeared most frequently was that of prevention. General oncology was the most frequently cited cancer type that was discussed with regard to CAM. Medical journals were the most frequently cited source in CAM/cancer news articles. The majority of news stories on CAM/cancer were neutral in tone, and the relationship between tone and evidence type reported was statistically significant. Observational studies rather than randomized controlled trials were the predominant form of evidence provided for research findings.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, the quality of how online news sources report research findings on complementary and alternative medicine therapies for cancer is fairly high. However, certain top online media sources are more reliable and informative than others when it comes to reporting about CAM remedies for cancer.

Quality of reporting on the vegetative state in Italian newspapers. The case of Eluana Englaro

BACKGROUND

Media coverage of the vegetative state (VS) includes refutations of the VS diagnosis and describes behaviors inconsistent with VS. We used a quality score to assess the reporting in articles describing the medical characteristics of VS in Italian newspapers.

METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

Our search covered a 7-month period from July 1, 2008, to February 28, 2009, using the online searchable databases of four major Italian newspapers: Corriere della Sera, La Repubblica, La Stampa, and Avvenire. Medical reporting was judged as complete if three core VS characteristics were described: patient unawareness of self and the environment, preserved wakefulness (eyes open), and spontaneous respiration (artificial ventilator not needed). We retrieved 2,099 articles, and 967 were dedicated to VS. Of these, 853 (88.2%) were non-medical and mainly focused on describing the political, legal, and ethical aspects of VS. Of the 114 (11.8%) medical articles, 53 (5.5%) discussed other medical problems such as death by dehydration, artificial nutrition, neuroimaging, brain death, or uterine hemorrhage, and 61 (6.3%) described VS. Of these 61, only 18 (1.9%) reported all three CORE characteristics and were judged complete. We found no differences among the four investigated newspapers (Fisher's exact  = 0.798), and incomplete articles were equally distributed between journalistic pieces and expert opinions (χ(2) = 1.8854, P = 0.170). Incorrect descriptions of VS were significantly more common among incomplete articles (13 of 43 vs. 1 of 18; Fisher's exact P = 0.047).

CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE

Core VS characteristics are rarely reported in Italian newspaper articles, which can alter adequate comprehension of new developments and (mis)inform political, legal, and ethical decisions.