Dataset Information

Media portrayal of illness-related medical crowdfunding: A content analysis of newspaper articles in the United States and Canada.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Medical crowdfunding is a growing phenomenon, and newspapers are publishing on the topic. This research analyzed how illness-related crowdfunding and crowdfunding campaigns have recently been represented in newspapers that are popular in the United States and Canada.

Methods

A sample of 336 articles about medical crowdfunding published during the two year time period from October 7, 2015 to October 6, 2017 was produced using a Factiva search of the English language newspapers with the largest Canadian and United States readership. A coding frame was developed for and applied to the sample to analyze content.

Results

Articles portrayed crowdfunding campaigns positively (43.75%) and neutrally (47.92%), but rarely negatively (4.76%). Articles mostly mentioned the crowdfunding phenomenon with a neutral characterization (93.75%). Few (8.63%) articles mentioned ethical issues with the phenomenon of crowdfunding. Ailments most commonly precipitating the need for a campaign included cancer (49.11%) and rare disease (as stated by the article, 36.01%). Most articles (83.04%) note where donations and contributions can be made, and 59.23% included a hyperlink to an online crowdfunding campaign website. Some articles (26.49%) mentioned a specific monetary goal for the fundraising campaign. Of the 70 (20.83%) articles that indicated the treatment sought may be inefficacious, was unproven, was experimental or lacked regulatory approval, 56 (80.00%) noted where contributions can be made and 36 (51.43%) hyperlinked directly to an online crowdfunding campaign.

Conclusions

Crowdfunding campaigns are portrayed positively much more often than negatively, many articles promote campaigns for unproven therapies, and links directly to crowdfunding campaign webpages are present in most articles. Overall, crowdfunding is often either implicitly or explicitly endorsed.

SUBMITTER: Murdoch B

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6478318 | biostudies-literature | 2019

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Media portrayal of illness-related medical crowdfunding: A content analysis of newspaper articles in the United States and Canada.

Murdoch Blake B Marcon Alessandro R AR Downie Daniel D Caulfield Timothy T

PloS one 20190423 4

<h4>Background</h4>Medical crowdfunding is a growing phenomenon, and newspapers are publishing on the topic. This research analyzed how illness-related crowdfunding and crowdfunding campaigns have recently been represented in newspapers that are popular in the United States and Canada.<h4>Methods</h4>A sample of 336 articles about medical crowdfunding published during the two year time period from October 7, 2015 to October 6, 2017 was produced using a Factiva search of the English language news ...[more]

PMID: 31013310

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Because organ transplantation relies on public support for donation, an analysis of public discourse around organ donation is essential. We investigated the portrayal of family veto - when a family overrides the deceased person's prior legally executed wishes to donate - in Canadian news media. METHODS:Using the Canadian Newsstream database, we identified articles published in English-language newspapers addressing family veto between 2000 and 2016. Guided by the theoretical perspectives of framing of media effects, we conducted a systematic content analysis of the articles to examine how the Canadian media framed family veto. An initial in-depth analysis of the data set in which themes and patterns were captured and recorded identified coding categories, including primary framing of family veto, prevalence, reasons, ethical or legal concerns and overall tone of the article. Two coders analyzed the data set to ensure intercoder reliability. RESULTS:A total of 133 relevant articles were identified. Family veto was framed predominantly as something that should not be allowed (81 articles [60.9%]) and as a reality that is little understood outside the transplantation community (45 [33.8%]). One-quarter of the articles (32 [24.1%]) highlighted ethical principles of autonomy and justice associated with family veto. Family veto was represented as a stumbling block in the present organ donation system, with most publications (107 [80.4%]) calling for change. There were differing interpretations of organ donation legislation, with 82 articles (61.6%) erroneously stating or suggesting that existing legislation permits family veto. INTERPRETATION:Family veto in organ donation was portrayed predominantly negatively. Many publications reflected a misunderstanding of the law concerning this issue. Although the framing of family veto highlighted important ethical and legal concerns as well as practice and policy considerations, research is needed to enhance the understanding of family veto in organ donation.

Project description:BackgroundEvidence suggests that the media can influence societal attitudes and beliefs to various social issues. This influence is especially strong for mental health issues, particularly suicide. As such, the aim of this study is to systematically examine Canadian newspaper coverage of the popular fictional Netflix series 13 Reasons Why, wherein the lead character dies by suicide in the final episode.MethodsArticles mentioning the series were systematically collected from best-selling Canadian newspapers in the three-month period following series release (April-June 2017). Articles were coded for adherence to key best practice recommendations on how to sensitively report suicide. Frequency counts and proportions were produced. An inductive qualitative thematic analysis was then undertaken to identify common themes within the articles.ResultsA total of 71 articles met study inclusion criteria. The majority of articles did not mention the suicide method (88.7%) and did not use stigmatizing language such as 'commit suicide' (84.5%). Almost half of the articles linked suicide to wider social issues (43.7%) or quoted a mental health professional (45.1%). 25% included information telling others considering suicide where to get help. Our qualitative analysis indicated that articles simultaneously praised and criticized the series. It was praised for (i) promoting dialogue and discussion about youth suicide; (ii) raising awareness of youth suicide issues; (iii) shining a spotlight on wider social issues that may affect suicide. It was criticized for (i) glorifying suicide, (ii) harmfully impacting young viewers; (iii) prompting pushback from educators and schools.ConclusionsNewspaper coverage of '13 Reasons Why' generally adhered to core best practice media recommendations, and sensitively discussed suicide from various angles, prompting productive discussion and dialogue about youth suicide. These findings suggest that the media can be an ally in promoting dialogue and raising awareness of important public health issues such as suicide.

Project description:ImportanceDespite major differences in their health care systems, medical crowdfunding is increasingly used to finance personal health care costs in Canada, the UK, and the US. However, little is known about the campaigns designed to raise monetary donations for medical expenses, the individuals who turn to crowdfunding, and their fundraising intent.ObjectiveTo examine the demographic characteristics of medical crowdfunding beneficiaries, campaign characteristics, and their association with funding success in Canada, the UK, and the US.Design, setting, and participantsThis cross-sectional study extracted and manually reviewed data from GoFundMe campaigns discoverable between February 2018 and March 2019. All available campaigns on each country domain's GoFundMe medical discovery webpage that benefitted a unique patient(s) were included from Canada, the UK, and the US. Data analysis was performed from March to December 2019.ExposuresCampaign and beneficiary characteristics.Main outcomes and measuresLog-transformed amount raised in US dollars.ResultsThis study examined 3396 campaigns including 1091 in Canada, 1082 in the UK, and 1223 in the US. Campaigns in the US (median [IQR], $38 204 [$31 200 to $52 123]) raised more funds than campaigns in Canada ($12 662 [$9377 to $19 251]) and the UK ($6285 [$4028 to $12 348]). In the overall cohort per campaign, Black individuals raised 11.5% less (95% CI, -19.0% to -3.2%; P = .006) than non-Black individuals, and male individuals raised 5.9% more (95% CI, 2.2% to 9.7%; P = .002) than female individuals. Female (39.4% of campaigns vs 50.8% of US population; difference, 11.3%; 95% CI, 8.6% to 14.1%; P < .001) and Black (5.3% of campaigns vs 13.4% of US population; difference, 8.1%; 95% CI, 6.8% to 9.3%; P < .001) beneficiaries were underrepresented among US campaigns. Campaigns primarily for routine treatment expenses were approximately 3 times more common in the US (77.9% [272 of 349 campaigns]) than in Canada (21.9% [55 of 251 campaigns]; difference, 56.0%; 95% CI, 49.3-62.7%; P < .001) or the UK (26.6% [127 of 478 campaigns]; difference, 51.4%; 95% CI, 45.5%-57.3%; P < .001). However, campaigns for routine care were less successful overall. Approved, inaccessible care and experimental care raised 35.7% (95% CI, 25.6% to 46.7%; P < .001) and 20.9% (95% CI, 13.3% to 29.1%; P < .001), respectively, more per campaign than routine care. Campaigns primarily for alternative treatment expenses (16.1% [174 of 1079 campaigns]) were nearly 4-fold more common for cancer (23.5% [144 of 614 campaigns]) vs noncancer (6.5% [30 of 465 campaigns]) diagnoses.Conclusions and relevanceImportant differences were observed in the reasons individuals turn to medical crowdfunding in the 3 countries examined that suggest racial and gender disparities in fundraising success. More work is needed to understand the underpinnings of these findings and their implications on health care provision in the countries examined.

Project description:INTRODUCTION:Online media may influence women's decision to undergo vaccination during pregnancy. The aims of this mixed-methods study were to: (1) examine the portrayal of maternal vaccination in online media and (2) establish the perceived target of vaccine protection as viewed by pregnant women and maternity healthcare professionals (HCPs). METHODS:Online media articles on maternal vaccination (published July-December 2012 or November 2015-April 2016) were identified through the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine's Vaccine Confidence Database and thematically analysed. Questionnaires for pregnant women and HCPs were distributed within four English hospitals (July 2017-January 2018). RESULTS:Of 203 articles identified, 60% related to pertussis vaccination, 33% to influenza and 6% both. The majority positively portrayed vaccination in pregnancy (97%), but inaccurate, negative articles persist which criticize pertussis vaccination's safety and efficacy. Positively-worded articles about pertussis tended to focus on infant protection and highlight examples of recent cases, whereas positively-worded articles about influenza focused on maternal protection. These themes were reflected in questionnaire responses from 314 pregnant women and 204 HCPs, who perceived pertussis vaccination as protecting the baby, and influenza vaccination as protecting the mother, or mother and baby equally. A minority of the pregnant women surveyed intended to decline influenza (22%) or pertussis (8%) vaccination. CONCLUSIONS:The majority of online articles support pertussis and influenza vaccination during pregnancy. The portrayal of pertussis vaccination as primarily benefiting the child, using real-examples, may influence its higher uptake compared with influenza. This approach should be considered by HCPs when recommending vaccination. HCPs should be prepared to provide advice to women hesitant about vaccination, including addressing any negative media, and consider educational strategies to counteract inaccurate information. Future studies should directly assess the influence of media on vaccine decision-making and establish which media platforms are typically used by pregnant women to gather information.

Project description:BackgroundPersons diagnosed with serious chronic illnesses and their caretakers experience multiple types of financial costs that strain their income and generate financial distress. Many turn to medical crowdfunding (MCF) to mitigate the harms of these costs on their health and quality of life.ObjectiveThis scoping review aims to summarize the research on MCF for persons diagnosed with serious chronic illness regarding study designs and methods; the responsible conduct of research practices; and study foci as they relate to stress, stress appraisals, and the coping processes.MethodsThis review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) and PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) guidelines. Eligible studies were conducted in countries designated as high income by the World Bank and focused on beneficiaries diagnosed with serious chronic illness. The findings of the included studies were summarized as they related to the key concepts in a conceptual framework derived from an established stress, appraisal, and coping framework and a conceptual model of financial toxicity in pediatric oncology.ResultsOverall, 26 studies were eligible for inclusion in the review. The main findings included a lack of integration of qualitative and quantitative approaches and the inconsistent reporting of the responsible conduct of research practices. The included studies focused on financial stressors that contributed to financial burden, such as out-of-pocket payments of medical bills, basic living expenses, medical travel expenses, and lost income owing to illness-related work disruptions. Few studies addressed stress appraisals as threatening or the adequacy of available financial resources. When mentioned, appraisals related to the global financial struggle during the COVID-19 pandemic or the capacity of social network members to donate funds. The consequences of MCF included the receipt of 3 forms of social support (tangible, informational, and emotional), privacy loss, embarrassment, and the propagation of scientifically unsupported information. Studies found that friends and family tended to manage MCF campaigns. Although most of the studies (21/26, 81%) focused on monetary outcomes, a few (5/26, 19%) concentrated on peoples' experiences with MCF.ConclusionsThe identified methodological gaps highlight the need for more robust and reproducible approaches to using the copious data available on public MCF platforms. The integration of quantitative and qualitative methods will allow for nuanced explorations of the MCF experience. A more consistent elaboration of strategies to promote the responsible conduct of research is warranted to minimize risk to populations that are vulnerable and express concerns regarding the loss of privacy. Finally, an examination of the unanticipated consequences of MCF is critical for the development of future interventions to optimize existing supports while providing needed supports, financial and nonfinancial, that are lacking.

Project description:Americans are increasingly relying on crowdfunding to pay for the costs of healthcare. In medical crowdfunding (MCF), online platforms allow individuals to appeal to social networks to request donations for health and medical needs. Users are often told that success depends on how they organize and share their campaigns to increase social network engagement. However, experts have cautioned that MCF could exacerbate health and social disparities by amplifying the choices (and biases) of the crowd and leveraging these to determine who has access to financial support for healthcare. To date, research on potential axes of disparity in MCF, and their impacts on fundraising outcomes, has been limited. To answer these questions, this paper presents an exploratory cross-sectional study of a randomized sample of 637 MCF campaigns on the popular platform GoFundMe, for which the race, gender, age, and relationships of campaigners and campaign recipients were categorized alongside campaign characteristics and outcomes. Using both descriptive and inferential statistics, the analysis examines race, gender, and age disparities in MCF use, and tests how these are associated with differential campaign outcomes. The results show systemic disparities in MCF use and outcomes: people of color (and black women in particular) are under-represented; there is significant evidence of an additional digital care labor burden on women organizers of campaigns; and marginalized race and gender groups are associated with poorer fundraising outcomes. Outcomes are only minimally associated with campaign characteristics under users' control, such as photos, videos, and updates. These results corroborate widespread concerns with how technology fuels health inequities, and how crowdfunding may be creating an unequal and biased marketplace for those seeking financial support to access healthcare. Further research and better data access are needed to explore these dynamics more deeply and inform policy for this largely unregulated industry.

Project description:BackgroundConcern regarding the reliability and accuracy of the health-related information provided by online newspaper articles has increased. Numerous criteria and items have been proposed and published regarding the quality assessment of online information, but there is no standard quality assessment tool available for online newspapers.ObjectiveThis study aimed to develop the Health Information Quality Assessment Tool (HIQUAL) for online newspaper articles.MethodsWe reviewed previous health information quality assessment tools and related studies and accordingly developed and customized new criteria. The interrater agreement for the new assessment tool was assessed for 3 newspaper articles on different subjects (colorectal cancer, obesity genetic testing, and hypertension diagnostic criteria) using the Fleiss κ and Gwet agreement coefficient. To compare the quality scores generated by each pair of tools, convergent validity was measured using the Kendall τ ranked correlation.ResultsOverall, the HIQUAL for newspaper articles comprised 10 items across 5 domains: reliability, usefulness, understandability, sufficiency, and transparency. The interrater agreement for the article on colorectal cancer was in the moderate to substantial range (Fleiss κ=0.48, SE 0.11; Gwet agreement coefficient=0.74, SE 0.13), while for the article introducing obesity genetic testing it was in the substantial range, with values of 0.63 (SE 0.28) and 0.86 (SE 0.10) for the two measures, respectively. There was relatively low agreement for the article on hypertension diagnostic criteria at 0.20 (SE 0.10) and 0.75 (SE 0.13), respectively. Validity of the correlation assessed with the Kendall τ showed good correlation between tools (HIQUAL vs DISCERN=0.72, HIQUAL vs QUEST [Quality Evaluation Scoring Tool]=0.69).ConclusionsWe developed a new assessment tool to evaluate the quality of health information in online newspaper articles, to help consumers discern accurate sources of health information. The HIQUAL can help increase the accuracy and quality of online health information in Korea.

Dataset Information

Media portrayal of illness-related medical crowdfunding: A content analysis of newspaper articles in the United States and Canada.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Media portrayal of illness-related medical crowdfunding: A content analysis of newspaper articles in the United States and Canada.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets