ArticleHeliyon2018
Developing a gist-extraction typology based on journalistic lead writing: A case of food risk news.
Article in Heliyon, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Enhancing risk and crisis communication with computational methods: A systematic literature review.Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis · 2025Article
- The characteristics of investigative news organizations in Indonesia between 2010-2012.Heliyon · 2021Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Risk communication is challenging since scientific knowledge is likely to be targeted to the public, which may have inadequate knowledge to understand jargons and expertise in risk messages. This study aims to construct a journalistic gist extraction typology, which can be useful for developing risk messages. Journalists' lead writing was conducted for 164 governmental press releases regarding food risks, and they were compared to factual information in original press releases. seven types of gist extraction were identified: 'exemplifying,' 'contextualizing,' 'grouping,' 'identifying likely victims,' 'emotional appeal,' 'separating verbatim,' and 'sense-making numbers.' The typology was valid with 92% of the total leads made by nine reporters being applicable to it. The content analysis revealed that 'exemplifying' was the most frequent gist extraction type, followed by 'contextualizing' and 'separating verbatim.'
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.