Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25729415›Full record

ArticleEcancermedicalscience2015

How do medical journalists treat cancer-related issues?

Haruka Nakada, Masaharu Tsubokura, Yukiko Kishi, Koichiro Yuji, Tomoko Matsumura, Masahiro Kami

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ecancermedicalscience, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Haruka NakadaDivision of Social Communication System for Advanced Clinical Research, Institute of Medical Science, The University of Tokyo, 4-6-1 Shirokanedai, Minato-ku, Tokyo 108-8639, Japan.
Masaharu TsubokuraDivision of Social Communication System for Advanced Clinical Research, Institute of Medical Science, The University of Tokyo, 4-6-1 Shirokanedai, Minato-ku, Tokyo 108-8639, Japan.
Yukiko KishiDivision of Social Communication System for Advanced Clinical Research, Institute of Medical Science, The University of Tokyo, 4-6-1 Shirokanedai, Minato-ku, Tokyo 108-8639, Japan.
Koichiro YujiDivision of Social Communication System for Advanced Clinical Research, Institute of Medical Science, The University of Tokyo, 4-6-1 Shirokanedai, Minato-ku, Tokyo 108-8639, Japan.
Tomoko MatsumuraDivision of Social Communication System for Advanced Clinical Research, Institute of Medical Science, The University of Tokyo, 4-6-1 Shirokanedai, Minato-ku, Tokyo 108-8639, Japan.
Masahiro KamiDivision of Social Communication System for Advanced Clinical Research, Institute of Medical Science, The University of Tokyo, 4-6-1 Shirokanedai, Minato-ku, Tokyo 108-8639, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cancer patients can obtain information about their illness through a variety of media sources. Therefore, it is important to know how medical journalists treat cancer-related issues; to that end, we sent self-administered questionnaires to 364 journalists in 82 organisations who had reported on medical issues for the Japanese media, asking for their reasons for reporting on cancer-related issues and the difficulties they had faced. The most common reason for reporting on health-related issues was their personal interest in a particular issue (n = 36). They mainly covered conventional therapies (n = 33), healthcare policy (n = 30), new therapies (n = 25), and diagnosis (n = 25). All of the journalists that were surveyed experienced some difficulties in reporting health issues. Significant concerns included the quality of information (n = 36), social impact (n = 35), lack of technical knowledge (n = 35), and difficulty in understanding technical terms (n = 35). Journalists commonly used personal networks, including physicians, as information sources (n = 42), as well as social media (e.g., e-mail, Twitter and Facebook) (n = 32). Topic selection was biased, with 35 of 48 journalists having never reported on topics concerning hospices. Physicians were the most trusted source of information about cancer, and journalists attached high importance to interviewing them. As medical knowledge is advancing rapidly, journalists may have increasing difficulty covering cancer-related issues.

Indexed as

information seekinginformation sourcemedical informationnews reportingpatient behaviour

Identifiers

PMID25729415
PMCPMC4335961

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.