Dataset Information

Interpretation of Results of Studies Evaluating an Intervention Highlighted in Google Health News: A Cross-Sectional Study of News.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Mass media through the Internet is a powerful means of disseminating medical research. We aimed to determine whether and how the interpretation of research results is misrepresented by the use of "spin" in the health section of Google News. Spin was defined as specific way of reporting, from whatever motive (intentional or unintentional), to emphasize that the beneficial effect of the intervention is greater than that shown by the results.

Methods

We conducted a cross-sectional study of news highlighted in the health section of US, UK and Canada editions of Google News between July 2013 and January 2014. We searched for news items for 3 days a week (i.e., Monday, Wednesday, and Friday) during 6 months and selected a sample of 130 news items reporting a scientific article evaluating the effect of an intervention on human health.

Results

In total, 78% of the news did not provide a full reference or electronic link to the scientific article. We found at least one spin in 114 (88%) news items and 18 different types of spin in news. These spin were mainly related to misleading reporting (59%) such as not reporting adverse events that were reported in the scientific article (25%), misleading interpretation (69%) such as claiming a causal effect despite non-randomized study design (49%) and overgeneralization/misleading extrapolation (41%) of the results such as extrapolating a beneficial effect from an animal study to humans (21%). We also identified some new types of spin such as highlighting a single patient experience for the success of a new treatment instead of focusing on the group results.

Conclusions

Interpretation of research results was frequently misrepresented in the health section of Google News. However, we do not know whether these spin were from the scientific articles themselves or added in the news.

SUBMITTER: Haneef R

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4608738 | biostudies-literature | 2015

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Interpretation of Results of Studies Evaluating an Intervention Highlighted in Google Health News: A Cross-Sectional Study of News.

Haneef Romana R Lazarus Clement C Ravaud Philippe P Yavchitz Amélie A Boutron Isabelle I

PloS one 20151016 10

<h4>Background</h4>Mass media through the Internet is a powerful means of disseminating medical research. We aimed to determine whether and how the interpretation of research results is misrepresented by the use of "spin" in the health section of Google News. Spin was defined as specific way of reporting, from whatever motive (intentional or unintentional), to emphasize that the beneficial effect of the intervention is greater than that shown by the results.<h4>Methods</h4>We conducted a cross-s ...[more]

PMID: 26473725

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo compare results reporting and the presence of spin in COVID-19 study preprints with their finalised journal publications.DesignCross-sectional study.SettingInternational medical literature.ParticipantsPreprints and final journal publications of 67 interventional and observational studies of COVID-19 treatment or prevention from the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register published between 1 March 2020 and 30 October 2020.Main outcome measuresStudy characteristics and discrepancies in (1) results reporting (number of outcomes, outcome descriptor, measure, metric, assessment time point, data reported, reported statistical significance of result, type of statistical analysis, subgroup analyses (if any), whether outcome was identified as primary or secondary) and (2) spin (reporting practices that distort the interpretation of results so they are viewed more favourably).ResultsOf 67 included studies, 23 (34%) had no discrepancies in results reporting between preprints and journal publications. Fifteen (22%) studies had at least one outcome that was included in the journal publication, but not the preprint; eight (12%) had at least one outcome that was reported in the preprint only. For outcomes that were reported in both preprints and journals, common discrepancies were differences in numerical values and statistical significance, additional statistical tests and subgroup analyses and longer follow-up times for outcome assessment in journal publications.At least one instance of spin occurred in both preprints and journals in 23/67 (34%) studies, the preprint only in 5 (7%), and the journal publications only in 2 (3%). Spin was removed between the preprint and journal publication in 5/67 (7%) studies; but added in 1/67 (1%) study.ConclusionsThe COVID-19 preprints and their subsequent journal publications were largely similar in reporting of study characteristics, outcomes and spin. All COVID-19 studies published as preprints and journal publications should be critically evaluated for discrepancies and spin.

Project description:BACKGROUND:This paper focuses on the collision of three factors: a growing emphasis on sharing research through open access publication, an increasing awareness of big data and its potential uses, and an engaged public interested in the privacy and confidentiality of their personal health information. One conceptual space where this collision is brought into sharp relief is with the open availability of patient medical photographs from peer-reviewed journal articles in the search results of online image databases such as Google Images. OBJECTIVE:The aim of this study was to assess the availability of patient medical photographs from published journal articles in Google Images search results and the factors impacting this availability. METHODS:We conducted a cross-sectional study using data from an evidence map of research with transgender, gender non-binary, and other gender diverse (trans) participants. For the original evidence map, a comprehensive search of 15 academic databases was developed in collaboration with a health sciences librarian. Initial search results produced 25,230 references after duplicates were removed. Eligibility criteria were established to include empirical research of any design that included trans participants or their personal information and that was published in English in peer-reviewed journals. We identified all articles published between 2008 and 2015 with medical photographs of trans participants. For each reference, images were individually numbered in order to track the total number of medical photographs. We used odds ratios (OR) to assess the association between availability of the clinical photograph on Google Images and the following factors: whether the article was openly available online (open access, Researchgate.net, or Academia.edu), whether the article included genital images, if the photographs were published in color, and whether the photographs were located on the journal article landing page. RESULTS:We identified 94 articles with medical photographs of trans participants, including a total of 605 photographs. Of the 94 publications, 35 (37%) included at least one medical photograph that was found on Google Images. The ability to locate the article freely online contributes to the availability of at least one image from the article on Google Images (OR 2.99, 95% CI 1.20-7.45). CONCLUSIONS:This is the first study to document the existence of medical photographs from peer-reviewed journals appearing in Google Images search results. Almost all of the images we searched for included sensitive photographs of patient genitals, chests, or breasts. Given that it is unlikely that patients consented to sharing their personal health information in these ways, this constitutes a risk to patient privacy. Based on the impact of current practices, revisions to informed consent policies and guidelines are required.

Project description:BACKGROUND:News stories represent an important source of information. We aimed to evaluate the impact of "spin" (i.e., misrepresentation of study results) in health news stories reporting studies of pharmacologic treatments on patients'/caregivers' interpretation of treatment benefit. METHODS:We conducted three two-arm, parallel-group, Internet-based randomized trials (RCTs) comparing the interpretation of news stories reported with or without spin. Each RCT considered news stories reporting a different type of study: (1) pre-clinical study, (2) phase I/II non-RCT, and (3) phase III/IV RCT. For each type of study, we identified news stories reported with spin that had earned mention in the press. Two versions of the news stories were used: the version with spin and a version rewritten without spin. Participants were patients/caregivers involved in Inspire, a large online community of more than one million patients/caregivers. The primary outcome was participants' interpretation assessed by one specific question "What do you think is the probability that 'treatment X' would be beneficial to patients?" (scale, 0 [very unlikely] to 10 [very likely]). RESULTS:For each RCT, 300 participants were randomly assigned to assess a news story with spin (n?=?150) or without spin (n?=?150), and 900 participants assessed a news story. Participants were more likely to consider that the treatment would be beneficial to patients when the news story was reported with spin. The mean (SD) score for the primary outcome for abstracts reported with and without spin for pre-clinical studies was 7.5 (2.2) versus 5.8 (2.8) (mean difference [95% CI] 1.7 [1.0-2.3], p?<?0.001); for phase I/II non-randomized trials, 7.6 (2.2) versus 5.8 (2.7) (mean difference 1.8 [1.0-2.5], p?<?0.001); and for phase III/IV RCTs, 7.2 (2.3) versus 4.9 (2.8) (mean difference 2.3 [1.4-3.2], p?<?0.001). CONCLUSIONS:Spin in health news stories reporting studies of pharmacologic treatments affects patients'/caregivers' interpretation. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03094078 , NCT03094104 , NCT03095586.

Project description:BackgroundDisrespectful and abusive maternity care is a complex phenomenon. In Namibia, HIV and high maternal mortality ratios make it vital to understand factors affecting maternity care quality. We report on two studies commissioned by Namibia's Ministry of Health and Social Services. A health worker study examined cultural and structural factors that influence maternity care workers' attitudes and practices, and a maternal and neonatal mortality study explored community perceptions about maternity care.MethodsThe health worker study involved medical officers, matrons, and registered or enrolled nurses working in Namibia's 35 district and referral hospitals. The study included a survey (N =?281) and 19 focus group discussions. The community study conducted 12 focus groups in five southern regions with recently delivered mothers and relatives.ResultsMost participants in the health worker study were experienced maternity care nurses. One-third (31%) of survey respondents reported witnessing or knowing of client mistreatment at their hospital, about half (49%) agreed that "sometimes you have to yell at a woman in labor," and a third (30%) agreed that pinching or slapping a laboring woman can make her push harder. Nurses were much more likely to agree with these statements than medical officers. Health workers' commitment to babies' welfare and stressful workloads were the two primary reasons cited to justify "harsh" behaviors. Respondents who were dissatisfied with their workload were twice as likely to approve of pinching or slapping. Half of the nurses surveyed (versus 14% of medical officers) reported providing care above or beneath their scope of work. The community focus group study identified 14 negative practices affecting clients' maternity care experiences, including both systemic and health-worker-related practices.ConclusionsNamibia's public sector hospital maternity units confront health workers and clients with structural and cultural impediments to quality care. Negative interactions between health workers and laboring women were reported as common, despite high health worker commitment to babies' welfare. Key recommendations include multicomponent interventions that address heavy workloads and other structural factors, educate communities and the media about maternity care and health workers' roles, incorporate client-centered care into preservice education, and ensure ongoing health worker mentoring and supervision.

Project description:BackgroundChlamydia trachomatis (chlamydia) is the most diagnosed sexually transmitted infection in Belgium. Screening programs focus on young women, due to the implications of chronic asymptomatic infections for reproductive health. Thereby, the frequency of infections in men and older adults is underestimated. This study aimed to estimate the point-prevalence of chlamydia in the broader Belgian population, to inform evidence-based prevention and control strategies.MethodsWe conducted two cross-sectional prevalence studies of chlamydia infection in the population of Belgium aged 16-59 years, 2018-2020. In the CT1 study 12,000 representative individuals were randomly selected from the national register and invited by letter to collect a urine sample at home. The CT2 study used urine samples collected through the Belgian Health Examination Survey. Molecular detection of chlamydia DNA was performed using Xpert® or Abbott Real-Time CT/NG assays. Weighted estimated prevalence and 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated per gender and age groups of 16/18-29, 30-44 and 45-59 years, relative to the general Belgian population. Data collected on sociodemographic variables and sexual behavior were used to identify potential risk factors for chlamydia infection through calculation of the odds ratio (OR).ResultsThe population-wide weighted estimated prevalence was 1.54% (95% CI 0.78-3) in CT1 and 1.76% (95% CI 0.63-4) in CT2. We observed no statistically significant difference between men and women or age groups. Civil relationship status (OR = 14.1 (95% CI 1.78-112), p < 0.01), sexual intercourse with a casual partner (OR = 6.31 (95% CI 1.66-24.1), p < 0.01) and > 3 sexual partners in the last 12 months (OR = 4.53 (95% CI 1.10-18.6), p = 0.02) were associated with higher relative risk for chlamydia infection.ConclusionNationwide prevalence studies are relevant to assess the distribution of chlamydia and inform public health actions. The overall low prevalence and heterogeneous distribution of chlamydia in the general Belgian population needs to be considered for future strategies and potential harm of testing and treating asymptomatic individuals need to be taken into account. Effective case management should include appropriate treatment of symptomatic patients and partner notification, and prevention strategies should encourage behaviors such as condom use.

Project description:BackgroundMedia frequently draws inappropriate causal statements from observational studies. We analyzed the reporting of study results in the Medical News section of the German medical journal Deutsches Ärzteblatt (DÄ).MethodsStudy design: Retrospective quantitative content analysis of randomly selected news reports and related original journal articles and press releases. A medical news report was selected if headlines comprised at least two linked variables. Two raters independently categorized the headline and text of each news report, conclusions of the abstract and full text of the related journal article, and the press release. The assessment instrument comprised five categories from 'neutral' to 'unconditionally causal'. Outcome measures: degree of matching between 1) news headlines and conclusions of the journal article, 2) headlines and text of news reports, 3) text and conclusions, and 4) headlines and press releases. We analyzed whether news headlines rated as unconditionally causal based on randomized controlled trials (RCTs).ResultsOne-thousand eighty-seven medical news reports were published between April 2015 and May 2016. The final random sample comprised 176 news reports and 100 related press releases. Degree of matching: 1) 45% (79/176) for news headlines and journal article conclusions, 2) 55% (97/176) for headlines and text, 3) 53% (93/176) for text and conclusions, and 4) 41% (41/100) for headlines and press releases. Exaggerations were found in 45% (80/176) of the headlines compared to the conclusions of the related journal article. Sixty-five of 137 unconditionally causal statements of the news headlines were phrased more weakly in the subsequent news text body. Only 52 of 137 headlines (38%) categorized as unconditionally causal reported RCTs.ConclusionReporting of medical news in the DÄ medical journal is misleading. Most headlines that imply causal associations were not based on RCTs. Medical journalists should follow standards of reporting scientific study results.

Project description:BackgroundPopulation-based intervention coverage indicators are widely used to track country and program progress in improving health and to evaluate health programs. Indicator validation studies that compare survey responses to a "gold standard" measure are useful to understand whether the indicator provides accurate information. The Improving Coverage Measurement (ICM) Core Group has developed and implemented a standard approach to validating coverage indicators measured in household surveys, described in this paper.MethodsThe general design of these studies includes measurement of true health status and intervention receipt (gold standard), followed by interviews with the individuals observed, and a comparison of the observations (gold standard) to the responses to survey questions. The gold standard should use a data source external to the respondent to document need for and receipt of an intervention. Most frequently, this is accomplished through direct observation of clinical care, and/or use of a study-trained clinician to obtain a gold standard diagnosis. Follow-up interviews with respondents should employ standard survey questions, where they exist, as well as alternative or additional questions that can be compared against the standard household survey questions.ResultsIndicator validation studies should report on participation at every stage, and provide data on reasons for non-participation. Metrics of individual validity (sensitivity, specificity, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve) and population-level validity (inflation factor) should be reported, as well as the percent of survey responses that are "don't know" or missing. Associations between interviewer and participant characteristics and measures of validity should be assessed and reported.ConclusionsThese methods allow respondent-reported coverage measures to be validated against more objective measures of need for and receipt of an intervention, and should be considered together with cognitive interviewing, discriminative validity, or reliability testing to inform decisions about which indicators to include in household surveys. Public health researchers should assess the evidence for validity of existing and proposed household survey coverage indicators and consider validation studies to fill evidence gaps.

Project description:INTRODUCTION:Detrimental effects of secondhand smoke (SHS) exposure are well established; however, data on SHS exposure among adolescents in Kuwait are lacking. Hence, this study sought to estimate the prevalence of household SHS exposure among two samples of adolescents in Kuwait and assess its variation by socioeconomic status and parental education level. METHODS:Data from two large school-based cross-sectional studies were analyzed. Adolescents attending public middle (n=3864; aged 11-14 years) and high (n=1959; aged 14-19 years) schools throughout Kuwait were enrolled in 2016-2017, and parental self-reported household SHS exposure was ascertained. Associations were assessed using Poisson regression with robust variance estimation, and adjusted prevalence ratios (APRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated. RESULTS:Overall, 45.8% (1755/3836; 95% CI: 44.2-47.3%) of the enrolled middle school students and 51.6% (998/1936; 95% CI: 49.3-53.8%) of the enrolled high school students were exposed to household SHS. Among middle and high school students, the prevalence of household SHS exposure increased as maternal/paternal education level and family income decreased. Among middle school students, paternal educational attainment of middle school or less compared to bachelor's degree or higher was associated with 1.60 times (95% CI: 1.44-1.79) higher household SHS exposure. Similarly, in the sample of middle school students, the prevalence of household SHS exposure significantly increased from 35.8% among children from families reporting the highest household income to 50.5% among children from families with the lowest reported household income (p-trend<0.001). CONCLUSIONS:Household SHS exposure is substantially high among adolescents in Kuwait. Enrolled adolescents from families with low socioeconomic status or with low parental education level have the highest household SHS exposure. These findings highlight the need for national comprehensive tobacco control policies and increasing parental awareness of the impact of SHS exposure on children.

Dataset Information

Interpretation of Results of Studies Evaluating an Intervention Highlighted in Google Health News: A Cross-Sectional Study of News.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Interpretation of Results of Studies Evaluating an Intervention Highlighted in Google Health News: A Cross-Sectional Study of News.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets