平面媒体与网络媒体对公众人物前列腺癌的报道分析

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q3 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES
Angelo Blancaflor, Katherine Danaher, Jacob Lally, Aaron Cleofas, Matthew Liu, Taylor Braunagel, Elias S Hyams
{"title":"平面媒体与网络媒体对公众人物前列腺癌的报道分析","authors":"Angelo Blancaflor, Katherine Danaher, Jacob Lally, Aaron Cleofas, Matthew Liu, Taylor Braunagel, Elias S Hyams","doi":"10.1007/s13187-025-02582-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Print and online media play a crucial role in shaping public understanding of diseases like prostate cancer (PCa), particularly through reporting on public figures. However, such media coverage can introduce bias by providing incomplete or non-evidence-based information. This study aimed to assess potential bias by applying a standardized rubric to articles discussing PCa in public figures. Articles were sourced from LexisNexis® using the terms \"prostate cancer\" and the name of a public figure diagnosed with the disease. The study analyzed 147 articles covering 49 public figures, selected based on relevance from top-circulation publications between 1994 and 2024. Of these, 95.9% had unbiased titles, 35.4% included expert quotes, and 27.2% mentioned risk factors such as age, race, and family history. However, 25.9% of the articles exhibited bias supporting PCa screening, and only 16.3% referenced scientific studies. Additionally, among the 45 articles published when shared decision-making (SDM) was the standard of care for screening decisions, only one referenced this concept. Thus, while titles were generally unbiased, statements supporting screening, low rates of scientific referencing, and minimal reference to SDM highlight limitations of this reporting that may bias readers' understanding of prostate cancer detection and treatment. These findings may provide a window into how reporting on medical conditions in public figures, which can influence readers' perceptions of disease, can improve in quality and completeness.</p>","PeriodicalId":50246,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cancer Education","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"An Analysis of Print and Online Media's Representation of Prostate Cancer in Public Figures.\",\"authors\":\"Angelo Blancaflor, Katherine Danaher, Jacob Lally, Aaron Cleofas, Matthew Liu, Taylor Braunagel, Elias S Hyams\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s13187-025-02582-6\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Print and online media play a crucial role in shaping public understanding of diseases like prostate cancer (PCa), particularly through reporting on public figures. However, such media coverage can introduce bias by providing incomplete or non-evidence-based information. This study aimed to assess potential bias by applying a standardized rubric to articles discussing PCa in public figures. Articles were sourced from LexisNexis® using the terms \\\"prostate cancer\\\" and the name of a public figure diagnosed with the disease. The study analyzed 147 articles covering 49 public figures, selected based on relevance from top-circulation publications between 1994 and 2024. Of these, 95.9% had unbiased titles, 35.4% included expert quotes, and 27.2% mentioned risk factors such as age, race, and family history. However, 25.9% of the articles exhibited bias supporting PCa screening, and only 16.3% referenced scientific studies. Additionally, among the 45 articles published when shared decision-making (SDM) was the standard of care for screening decisions, only one referenced this concept. Thus, while titles were generally unbiased, statements supporting screening, low rates of scientific referencing, and minimal reference to SDM highlight limitations of this reporting that may bias readers' understanding of prostate cancer detection and treatment. These findings may provide a window into how reporting on medical conditions in public figures, which can influence readers' perceptions of disease, can improve in quality and completeness.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50246,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Cancer Education\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Cancer Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s13187-025-02582-6\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cancer Education","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s13187-025-02582-6","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

印刷和在线媒体在塑造公众对前列腺癌等疾病的理解方面发挥着至关重要的作用,特别是通过对公众人物的报道。然而,这种媒体报道可能通过提供不完整或无证据的信息而引入偏见。本研究旨在通过对讨论公众人物PCa的文章应用标准化标准来评估潜在的偏倚。文章来源于LexisNexis®,使用术语“前列腺癌”和被诊断患有该疾病的公众人物的名字。该研究分析了147篇涉及49位公众人物的文章,这些文章是根据1994年至2024年间发行量最大的出版物的相关性选出的。其中,95.9%有公正的标题,35.4%包含专家引用,27.2%提到年龄、种族和家族史等风险因素。然而,25.9%的文章表现出支持PCa筛选的偏倚,只有16.3%的文章引用了科学研究。此外,在将共享决策(SDM)作为筛查决策的护理标准时发表的45篇文章中,只有一篇提到了这一概念。因此,虽然标题总体上是公正的,但支持筛查的陈述、低科学参考率和对SDM的极少参考突出了本报告的局限性,这可能会使读者对前列腺癌检测和治疗的理解产生偏差。这些发现可能为了解公众人物医疗状况的报道如何提高质量和完整性提供了一个窗口,这些报道会影响读者对疾病的看法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
An Analysis of Print and Online Media's Representation of Prostate Cancer in Public Figures.

Print and online media play a crucial role in shaping public understanding of diseases like prostate cancer (PCa), particularly through reporting on public figures. However, such media coverage can introduce bias by providing incomplete or non-evidence-based information. This study aimed to assess potential bias by applying a standardized rubric to articles discussing PCa in public figures. Articles were sourced from LexisNexis® using the terms "prostate cancer" and the name of a public figure diagnosed with the disease. The study analyzed 147 articles covering 49 public figures, selected based on relevance from top-circulation publications between 1994 and 2024. Of these, 95.9% had unbiased titles, 35.4% included expert quotes, and 27.2% mentioned risk factors such as age, race, and family history. However, 25.9% of the articles exhibited bias supporting PCa screening, and only 16.3% referenced scientific studies. Additionally, among the 45 articles published when shared decision-making (SDM) was the standard of care for screening decisions, only one referenced this concept. Thus, while titles were generally unbiased, statements supporting screening, low rates of scientific referencing, and minimal reference to SDM highlight limitations of this reporting that may bias readers' understanding of prostate cancer detection and treatment. These findings may provide a window into how reporting on medical conditions in public figures, which can influence readers' perceptions of disease, can improve in quality and completeness.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Cancer Education
Journal of Cancer Education 医学-医学:信息
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
6.20%
发文量
122
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Cancer Education, the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education (AACE) and the European Association for Cancer Education (EACE), is an international, quarterly journal dedicated to the publication of original contributions dealing with the varied aspects of cancer education for physicians, dentists, nurses, students, social workers and other allied health professionals, patients, the general public, and anyone interested in effective education about cancer related issues. Articles featured include reports of original results of educational research, as well as discussions of current problems and techniques in cancer education. Manuscripts are welcome on such subjects as educational methods, instruments, and program evaluation. Suitable topics include teaching of basic science aspects of cancer; the assessment of attitudes toward cancer patient management; the teaching of diagnostic skills relevant to cancer; the evaluation of undergraduate, postgraduate, or continuing education programs; and articles about all aspects of cancer education from prevention to palliative care. We encourage contributions to a special column called Reflections; these articles should relate to the human aspects of dealing with cancer, cancer patients, and their families and finding meaning and support in these efforts. Letters to the Editor (600 words or less) dealing with published articles or matters of current interest are also invited. Also featured are commentary; book and media reviews; and announcements of educational programs, fellowships, and grants. Articles should be limited to no more than ten double-spaced typed pages, and there should be no more than three tables or figures and 25 references. We also encourage brief reports of five typewritten pages or less, with no more than one figure or table and 15 references.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信