HealthNewsReview.org | Independent Expert Reviews of News Stories | Holding Health and Medical Journalism Accountable

Why this matters to patients

As a health care consumer, Dave deBronkart says he scrutinizes the source of the information he receives in news stories, including sniffing out stories that may be largely based on news releases from vested interests.

As someone with Type 2 diabetes, Loretta emphasizes the quality, not the quantity of information sources available to patients like her.

Why does this Matter?

We think that claims about new treatments, tests, products and procedures should be based on evidence, not on beliefs, not on intuition, not on business hopes.
From the examples above you can see several different ways in which biased sources can influence news stories.
In health care you're often encouraged to get a second opinion.
In health care journalism, we consider it essential that second opinions be sought - from independent experts who have no vested interest in the approach being discussed.
There are many vested interests in health care trying to influence consumer choices. We expect journalism to use independent verification - not to rely on news releases or company spokesmen.
Over-enthusiastic claims are not made solely by drug companies or medical device manufacturers. Promotions of progress in research by academic medicine also can be questionable.
A team from Dartmouth Medical School and the Veterans Affairs Outcomes Group published an analysis in the Annals of Internal Medicine that concluded: "Press releases from academic medical centers often promote research that has uncertain relevance to human health and do not provide key facts or acknowledge important limitations."
When you hear hyperbole about health care claims, also consider the source. And then ask yourself the next question, "Do they have something to gain?"
Do they have a conflict of interest?

Doubts on mammogram software

The story provides many clinical perspectives on the computer-aided detection (CAD) technology. The reporter interviews not only the study author and the author of an accompanying NEJM editorial, but also clinicians and radiologists who talk about use of CAD in practice. Interviews with clinicians who provide their rationale for not using the CAD technology provide excellent balance to the story.

Vertebroplasty: Unnecessary Procedure?

The producers earn extra points for using three well-selected sources:

the author of one of the studies
an authoritative advocate of evidence-based treatment with knowledge of these studies
the U.S. President

Most importantly, an independent clinician who does the surgery a lot, considers it useful and isn't quite sure what to make of the results.

Internet-Based Therapy Show Promise For Insomnia

This story includes comments from two independent experts, as well as a study co-author. The writer also mentions that the study was funded by a grant from the National Institute of Mental Health.

Proton therapy fights cancer

No individuals with expertise in prostate cancer, prostate cancer treatment, or prostate cancer patients appear to have been interviewed as part of this story.
Interview comments from a single patient without reference to the evidence or perspectives of experts in the field is not first-rate journalism.

New migraine cure? Forehead lift surgery helps patients

The sources for the story are just 2 people - a woman whose facelift successfully relieved her migraines and the surgeon who performs these procedures and wrote the study about facelifts for migraine headaches cited in the story (clearly not a disinterested party). The story fails to represent the points of view of the 43% of people who did not experience migraine pain relief after their facelifts or of experts who could place this research into the much broader context of the migraine literature.

Tulsa company hopes device can ease cancer screenings

The reporter talks to one source, a man whose job is to sell more of the machines in question.