SynthesisPloS one2023
Groundhog Day in the emergency department: A systematic review of 20 years of news coverage in Australia.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study examined how the Australian news media have portrayed public hospital Emergency Departments (EDs) over the last two decades. A systematic review and media frame analysis, searching Factiva and Australia and New Zealand News Stream for digital and print news articles published between January 2000 and January 2020. Eligibility criteria were (1) discussed EDs in public hospitals; (2) the primary focus of the article was the ED; (3) focused on the Australian context; (4) were published by one of the Australian state-based news outlets (e.g., The Sydney Morning Herald, Herald Sun). A pair of reviewers independently screened 242 articles for inclusion according to the pre-established criteria. Discrepancies were resolved via discussion. 126 articles met the inclusion criteria. Pairs of independent reviewers identified frames in 20% of the articles using an inductive approach to develop a framework for coding the remaining articles. News media rely heavily on reporting problems within and with the ED, while also proposing a cause. Praise for EDs was minimal. Opinions were primarily from government spokespeople, professional associations, and doctors. ED performance was often reported as fact, with no reference to the source of the information. Rhetorical framing devices, such as hyperbole and imagery, were used to emphasise dominant themes. The negative bias inherent in news media reporting of EDs could potentially damage public awareness of ED functioning, with implications for the likelihood of the public's accessing ED services. Like in the film Groundhog Day, news media reporting is stuck in a loop reporting the same narrative over and over again.
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.