NEW DELHI: Media is often blamed for exaggeration of health research findings but a study has found that most of the exaggeration did not happen in the media but was already present in the text of the press releases produced by academics and their establishments.
The study conducted by Petroc Sumner a professor in the School of Psychology, Cardiff University along with several others looked at 462 press releases sent out by 20 leading UK universities over one year. They traced 668 associated news stories and the original academic papers that reported the scientific findings. The study found that the chances of exaggeration in the news were far higher when the press releases themselves contained inflated claims.
The study revealed that over a third of press releases contained exaggerated advice, causal claims, or inference to humans. When press releases contained exaggeration, 58% to 86% of the news stories derived from them contained similar exaggeration. However, only 10%-18% of news reports were exaggerated when the press releases were not exaggerated, found the study.
"Changes in presentation style between peer reviewed papers and press releases are expected in order to spark the interest of journalists. But seeking simplification and stimulating interest does not justify exaggeration," stated the study published in the British Medical Journal. Most press releases issued by universities are drafted in dialogue between scientists and press officers and are not released without the approval of scientists, pointed out the study. The study concluded that if the majority of exaggeration occurs within academic establishments, then the academic community has the opportunity to make an important difference to the quality of biomedical and health related news.
In a related editorial Ben Goldacre, a research fellow at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine pointed out why such misrepresentation or exaggeration was a serious matter. "Evidence suggests that media coverage can have an effect on the uptake of treatments and services and even on subsequent academic citations," said Goldacre. Since best practice guidelines for academics, journals and press officers seem to be routinely ignored, Goldacre suggested steps similar to those used by academic journals "to improve standards and earn trust in science"-- accountability, transparency and feedback.
To ensure accountability Goldacre recommended that all academic press releases should have named authors, including both the press officers involved and the individual named academics from the original academic paper. "This would create professional reputational consequences for misrepresenting scientific findings in a press release," he stated.
Press releases could be treated as a part of the scientific publication, linked to the paper, referenced directly from the academic paper being promoted, and presented through existing infrastructure as online data appendices, in full view of peers. Goldacre felt this could lead to greater transparency instead of the current practice of sending press releases privately to journalists, rarely linking from academic papers.
For feedback he suggested that academic journals ought to publish commentary and letters about misrepresentations in the press release, just as they publish commentary on the academic paper itself. He felt that this would produce an information trail and accountability among peers and the public.