Interventions to improve media coverage of medical research: a codesigned feasibility and acceptability study with Australian journalists

Abstract

ObjectivesAlthough the media can influence public perceptions and utilisation of healthcare, journalists generally receive no routine training in interpreting and reporting on medical research. Given growing evidence about the problems of medical overuse, the need for quality media reporting has become a greater priority. This study aimed to codesign and assess the feasibility of a multicomponent training intervention for journalists in Australia.DesignA small pragmatic feasibility study using a pre- and postdesign.Setting90 min online workshop.ParticipantsEight journalists currently working in Australia, recruited through the study’s journalist advisor and existing contacts of the researchers.InterventionThe training intervention covered a range of topics, including study designs, conflicts of interest, misleading medical statistics, population screening and overdiagnosis. The intervention also provided tools to help journalists with reporting, including a Tip Sheet and list of expert contacts in health and medicine. Preworkshop and postworkshop questionnaires were administered via Qualtrics.MeasuresAcceptability and feasibility of the intervention, and journalists’ knowledge of overdiagnosis and common issues with health stories. Quantitative results were analysed descriptively using SPSS. Qualitative data were thematically analysed.ResultsAll participants completed preworkshop and postworkshop questionnaires, and 6 completed the 6-week follow-up (75% retention). Feasibility findings suggest the intervention is acceptable and relevant to journalists, with participants indicating the workshop increased confidence with reporting on medical research. We observed increases in knowledge preworkshop to postworkshop for all knowledge measures on overdiagnosis and common issues with media coverage of medicine. Analysis of free-text responses identified several areas for improvement, such as including more examples to aid understanding of the counterintuitive topic of overdiagnosis and more time for discussion.ConclusionsPiloting suggested the multicomponent training intervention is acceptable to journalists and provided important feedback and insights to inform a future trial of the intervention’s impact on media coverage of medicine.

What Promotes Medical Overuse: Perspective on Evolutionary Game between Administration and Medical Institutions

“…Previous studies mainly focused on retrospective analysis of data [ 14 , 15 ] or on the analysis of treatment for a specific disease or the overuse of a single service [ 16 ] and the influence factors of medical overuse [ 17 , 18 ]; some findings sought to determine if there was variance among medical specialties [ 19 ]. To reduce medical overuse, it is found that intervention's impact on media coverage of medicine can help patients to stay away from medical overuse [ 20 ]. It is found that NHSA's supervising and punishment of doctors' behaviour, establishing reputation mechanism, and protecting patient's right are important factors to restrain medical overuse behaviour [ 21 ].…”

Words and numbers: a comparative study of medical and journalism students’ descriptors of risk, numeracy and preferences for health risk communication

“…In an experimental study on the impact of different formats of news coverage of an epidemic on risk perceptions of the public, Klemm et al found that perceptions of risk and severity were primarily driven by objective risk characteristics rather than emotion-laden news formats [ 10 ]. Journalists, therefore, can have a key role in presenting objective information about risk, yet often have no formal training in statistical reasoning [ 11 ] or presenting and interpreting medical research [ 12 ] and can rely on narratives rather than numbers [ 13 ].…”