益智药“像咖啡一样常见”：媒体对神经增强的炒作。
Smart drugs "as common as coffee": media hype about neuroenhancement.
机构信息
UQ Centre for Clinical Research, The University of Queensland, Herston, Queensland, Australia.
出版信息
PLoS One. 2011;6(11):e28416. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0028416. Epub 2011 Nov 30.
BACKGROUND
The use of prescription drugs to improve cognitive functioning in normal persons--neuroenhancement"--has gained recent attention from bioethicists and neuroscientists. Enthusiasts claim that the practice is widespread and increasing, and has many potential benefits; however recent evidence provides weak support for these claims. In this study we explored how the newsprint media portrays neuroenhancement.
AIMS
We conducted an empirical study of media reporting of neuroenhancement to explore: media portrayals of the prevalence of neuroenhancement; the types of evidence used by the media to support claims about its prevalence; and, the possible benefits and risks of neuroenhancement mentioned in these media articles.
METHODS
Using the Factiva database, we found 142 newspaper articles about the non-medical use prescription drugs for neuroenhancement for the period 2008-2010. We conducted a thematic content analysis of how articles portrayed the prevalence of neuroenhancement; what type of evidence they used in support; and, the potential benefits and risks/side-effects of neuroenhancement that were mentioned.
RESULTS
87% of media articles mentioned the prevalence of neuroenhancement, and 94% portrayed it as common, increasing or both. 66% referred to the academic literature to support these claims and 44% either named an author or a journal. 95% of articles mentioned at least one possible benefit of using prescription drugs for neuroenhancement, but only 58% mentioned any risks/side effects. 15% questioned the evidence for efficacy of prescription drugs to produce benefits to users.
CONCLUSIONS
News media articles mentioned the possible benefits of using drugs for neuroenhancement more than the potential risks/side effects, and the main source for media claims that neuroenhancement is common and increasingly widespread has been reports from the academic literature that provide weak support for this claim. We urge journalists and researchers to be cautious in their portrayal of the non-medical use of drugs for neuroenhancement.
背景
在正常人中使用处方药物来改善认知功能——“神经增强”——最近引起了生物伦理学家和神经科学家的关注。支持者声称，这种做法已经广泛普及并且还在增加，并具有许多潜在的好处；然而，最近的证据对这些说法提供的支持有限。在这项研究中，我们探讨了新闻媒体对神经增强的描述。
目的
我们对神经增强的媒体报道进行了实证研究，以探讨：新闻媒体对神经增强普及程度的描述；媒体用来支持其普及程度的说法的证据类型；以及这些媒体文章中提到的神经增强的可能好处和风险。
方法
我们使用 Factiva 数据库，找到了 2008 年至 2010 年期间关于非医疗用途处方药物进行神经增强的 142 篇报纸文章。我们对文章如何描述神经增强的普及程度；他们使用了哪些类型的证据来支持；以及提到的神经增强的潜在好处和风险/副作用进行了主题内容分析。
结果
87%的媒体文章提到了神经增强的普及程度，94%的文章将其描述为普遍、增加或两者兼而有之。66%的文章参考了学术文献来支持这些说法，44%的文章提到了作者或期刊的名字。95%的文章提到了至少一种使用处方药物进行神经增强的潜在好处，但只有 58%的文章提到了任何风险/副作用。15%的文章质疑了处方药物对使用者产生好处的疗效证据。
结论
新闻媒体文章提到使用药物进行神经增强的潜在好处多于潜在风险/副作用，而媒体声称神经增强是普遍且日益普遍的主要依据是学术文献的报告，这些报告对这一说法提供的支持有限。我们敦促记者和研究人员在描述非医疗用途药物进行神经增强时要谨慎。
Zotero 插件