Neumeyer-Gromen A, Bodemer N, Müller S M, Gigerenzer G
Max-Planck-Institut für Bildungsforschung, Harding Center for Risk Literacy, Lentzeallee 94, 14195, Berlin, Deutschland.
Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforschung Gesundheitsschutz. 2011 Nov;54(11):1197-210. doi: 10.1007/s00103-011-1347-5.
With the introduction and recommendation of the new HPV (human papillomavirus) vaccination in 2007, cervical cancer prevention has evoked large public interest. Is the public able to make informed decisions on the basis of media reports and brochures? To answer this question, an analysis of media coverage of HPV vaccination (Gardasil®) and Pap (Papanicolaou) screening was conducted from 2007-2009, which investigated the minimum requirement of completeness (pros and cons), transparency (absolute numbers), and correctness (references concerning outcome, uncertainty, magnitude) of the information. As a bench mark, facts boxes with concise data on epidemiology, etiology, benefits, harms, and costs were compiled in advance. Although all vaccination reports and brochures covered the impact of prevention, only 41% provided concrete numbers on effectiveness (90/220) and 2% on absolute risk reductions for the cancer surrogate dysplasia (5/220), whereby none of the latter numbers was correct. The prevention potential was correctly presented once. Only 48% (105/220) mentioned pros and cons. With regard to screening, 20% (4/20) provided explicit data on test quality and one expressed these in absolute numbers, while 25% (5/20) reported the prevention potential; all given numbers were correct. Finally, 25% (5/20) mentioned the possibility of false positive results. Minimum requirements were fulfilled by 1/220 vaccination and 1/20 screening reports. At present, informed decision making based on media coverage is hardly possible.
随着2007年新型人乳头瘤病毒（HPV）疫苗的推出和推荐，宫颈癌预防引起了公众的广泛关注。公众能否根据媒体报道和宣传册做出明智的决定？为了回答这个问题，对2007年至2009年期间HPV疫苗接种（加德西疫苗®）和巴氏（帕帕尼科拉乌）筛查的媒体报道进行了分析，该分析调查了信息完整性（利弊）、透明度（绝对数字）和正确性（关于结果、不确定性、程度的参考文献）的最低要求。作为基准，预先编制了包含流行病学、病因学、益处、危害和成本简明数据的事实框。尽管所有疫苗接种报告和宣传册都涵盖了预防的影响，但只有41%提供了有效性的具体数字（90/220），2%提供了癌症替代发育异常绝对风险降低的数字（5/220），而后者没有一个数字是正确的。预防潜力只被正确提及过一次。只有48%（105/220）提到了利弊。关于筛查，20%（4/20）提供了检测质量的明确数据，其中一份用绝对数字表示，而25%（5/20）报告了预防潜力；所有给出的数字都是正确的。最后，25%（5/20）提到了假阳性结果的可能性。220份疫苗接种报告和20份筛查报告中分别只有1份满足了最低要求。目前，基于媒体报道做出明智决策几乎是不可能的。
