• Steven Woloshin, Lisa M Schwartz, Samuel L Casella, Abigail T Kennedy, and Robin J Larson.
• Veterans Affairs Outcomes Group, Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, White River Junction, Vermont 05009, USA.
• Ann. Intern. Med. 2009 May 5;150(9):613-8.

BackgroundThe news media are often criticized for exaggerated coverage of weak science. Press releases, a source of information for many journalists, might be a source of those exaggerations.ObjectiveTo characterize research press releases from academic medical centers.DesignContent analysis.SettingPress releases from 10 medical centers at each extreme of U.S. News & World Report's rankings for medical research.MeasurementsPress release quality.ResultsAcademic medical centers issued a mean of 49 press releases annually. Among 200 randomly selected releases analyzed in detail, 87 (44%) promoted animal or laboratory research, of which 64 (74%) explicitly claimed relevance to human health. Among 95 releases about primary human research, 22 (23%) omitted study size and 32 (34%) failed to quantify results. Among all 113 releases about human research, few (17%) promoted studies with the strongest designs (randomized trials or meta-analyses). Forty percent reported on the most limited human studies--those with uncontrolled interventions, small samples (<30 participants), surrogate primary outcomes, or unpublished data--yet 58% lacked the relevant cautions.LimitationThe effects of press release quality on media coverage were not directly assessed.ConclusionPress releases from academic medical centers often promote research that has uncertain relevance to human health and do not provide key facts or acknowledge important limitations.Primary Funding SourceNational Cancer Institute.

7 keywords...

hide…