IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0140889.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Interpretation of Results of Studies Evaluating an Intervention Highlighted in Google Health News: A Cross-Sectional Study of News

Author

Listed:
  • Romana Haneef
  • Clement Lazarus
  • Philippe Ravaud
  • Amélie Yavchitz
  • Isabelle Boutron

Abstract

Background: Mass media through the Internet is a powerful means of disseminating medical research. We aimed to determine whether and how the interpretation of research results is misrepresented by the use of “spin” in the health section of Google News. Spin was defined as specific way of reporting, from whatever motive (intentional or unintentional), to emphasize that the beneficial effect of the intervention is greater than that shown by the results. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study of news highlighted in the health section of US, UK and Canada editions of Google News between July 2013 and January 2014. We searched for news items for 3 days a week (i.e., Monday, Wednesday, and Friday) during 6 months and selected a sample of 130 news items reporting a scientific article evaluating the effect of an intervention on human health. Results: In total, 78% of the news did not provide a full reference or electronic link to the scientific article. We found at least one spin in 114 (88%) news items and 18 different types of spin in news. These spin were mainly related to misleading reporting (59%) such as not reporting adverse events that were reported in the scientific article (25%), misleading interpretation (69%) such as claiming a causal effect despite non-randomized study design (49%) and overgeneralization/misleading extrapolation (41%) of the results such as extrapolating a beneficial effect from an animal study to humans (21%). We also identified some new types of spin such as highlighting a single patient experience for the success of a new treatment instead of focusing on the group results. Conclusions: Interpretation of research results was frequently misrepresented in the health section of Google News. However, we do not know whether these spin were from the scientific articles themselves or added in the news.

Suggested Citation

  • Romana Haneef & Clement Lazarus & Philippe Ravaud & Amélie Yavchitz & Isabelle Boutron, 2015. "Interpretation of Results of Studies Evaluating an Intervention Highlighted in Google Health News: A Cross-Sectional Study of News," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(10), pages 1-15, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0140889
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0140889
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0140889
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0140889&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0140889?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Amélie Yavchitz & Isabelle Boutron & Aida Bafeta & Ibrahim Marroun & Pierre Charles & Jean Mantz & Philippe Ravaud, 2012. "Misrepresentation of Randomized Controlled Trials in Press Releases and News Coverage: A Cohort Study," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(9), pages 1-11, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Paula Silva & María P. Portillo & Alfredo Fernández-Quintela, 2022. "Resveratrol and Wine: An Overview of Thirty Years in the Digital News," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(23), pages 1-14, November.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Cohen, Scott & Stienmetz, Jason & Hanna, Paul & Humbracht, Michael & Hopkins, Debbie, 2020. "Shadowcasting tourism knowledge through media: Self-driving sex cars?," Annals of Tourism Research, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    2. Joseph W Taylor & Marie Long & Elizabeth Ashley & Alex Denning & Beatrice Gout & Kayleigh Hansen & Thomas Huws & Leifa Jennings & Sinead Quinn & Patrick Sarkies & Alex Wojtowicz & Philip M Newton, 2015. "When Medical News Comes from Press Releases—A Case Study of Pancreatic Cancer and Processed Meat," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(6), pages 1-13, June.
    3. Michael T M Wang & Mark J Bolland & Greg Gamble & Andrew Grey, 2015. "Media Coverage, Journal Press Releases and Editorials Associated with Randomized and Observational Studies in High-Impact Medical Journals: A Cohort Study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(12), pages 1-6, December.
    4. , Aisdl, 2020. "Let’s Do Better: Public Representations of COVID-19 Science," OSF Preprints 3cpvs, Center for Open Science.
    5. Robert G. Alexander & Stephen L. Macknik & Susana Martinez-Conde, 2022. "What the Neuroscience and Psychology of Magic Reveal about Misinformation," Publications, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-19, September.
    6. Michael T M Wang & Greg Gamble & Mark J Bolland & Andrew Grey, 2014. "Press Releases Issued by Supplements Industry Organisations and Non-Industry Organisations in Response to Publication of Clinical Research Findings: A Case-Control Study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(7), pages 1-14, July.
    7. Estelle Dumas-Mallet & Andy Smith & Thomas Boraud & François Gonon, 2017. "Poor replication validity of biomedical association studies reported by newspapers," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(2), pages 1-15, February.
    8. João A G Moreira & Xiao Han T Zeng & Luís A Nunes Amaral, 2015. "The Distribution of the Asymptotic Number of Citations to Sets of Publications by a Researcher or from an Academic Department Are Consistent with a Discrete Lognormal Model," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(11), pages 1-17, November.
    9. Markus Lehmkuhl & Nikolai Promies, 2020. "Frequency distribution of journalistic attention for scientific studies and scientific sources: An input–output analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(11), pages 1-20, November.
    10. Arnaud Vaganay, 2016. "Outcome Reporting Bias in Government-Sponsored Policy Evaluations: A Qualitative Content Analysis of 13 Studies," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(9), pages 1-21, September.
    11. Paula Silva & María P. Portillo & Alfredo Fernández-Quintela, 2022. "Resveratrol and Wine: An Overview of Thirty Years in the Digital News," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(23), pages 1-14, November.
    12. Andrew W Brown & David B Allison, 2014. "Using Crowdsourcing to Evaluate Published Scientific Literature: Methods and Example," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(7), pages 1-9, July.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0140889. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.