ArticleAnnals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England2011
How does the media profile of cancer compare with prevalence?
Article in Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- Are cancer registries a viable tool for cancer survivor outreach? A feasibility study.Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2013Trial
- Experiences of colorectal cancer patients in Australia: a qualitative study on specialised nursing and supportive care.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026Article
- Bowel cancer knowledge gaps evident among Irish residents: results of a national questionnaire survey.Irish journal of medical science · 2023Article
- Mass media and risk factors for cancer: the under-representation of age.BMC public health · 2018Article
- Melanoma awareness and prevalence of dermoscopic examination among internet users: a cross-sectional survey.Postepy dermatologii i alergologii · 2016Article
- Article
- The media and cancer: education or entertainment? An ethnographic study of European cancer journalists.Ecancermedicalscience · 2014Article
- The portrayal of bariatric surgery in the UK print media.Obesity surgery · 2012Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionKnowledge and understanding of disease can influence time to presentation and potentially, therefore, cancer survival rates. The media is one of the most important sources of public health information and it influences the awareness and perception of cancer. It is not known if the reportage of cancer by the media is representative to the true incidence of disease. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe top 10 UK daily newspapers were assessed over a 1-year period for the 10 most common UK cancers via their on-line search facilities.
resultsOf the 5832 articles identified, there was marked over-representation of breast, kidney and stomach cancer with ratios of prevalence to reporting of 1.4, 1.9 and 3.2 to 1, respectively. Colorectal, non-Hodgkin lymphoma, bladder and oesophageal cancers are all markedly under-represented with ratios of 0.4, 0.2, 0.6 and 0.4 to 1, respectively.
conclusionsA policy of media advocacy by health professionals could enhance the information provided by the media and thus reflect the true extent of disease. A partnership between health professionals and journalists could result in articles that are relevant to the population, informative and in a style and format that is easily comprehendible. Targeted public health information could highlight the 'red-flag' symptoms and break down any stigma associated with cancer. This enhanced awareness could improve the health-seeking behaviour of the general population and reduce the delay from symptoms to diagnosis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.