School of Medical Sciences, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
PLoS One. 2020 Nov 9;15(11):e0242133. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0242133. eCollection 2020.
Cancer research in the news is often associated with sensationalised and inaccurate reporting, which may give rise to false hopes and expectations. The role of study selection for cancer-related news stories is an important but less commonly acknowledged issue, as the outcomes of primary research are generally less reliable than those of meta-analyses and systematic reviews. Few studies have investigated the quality of research that makes the news and no previous analyses of the proportions of primary and secondary research in the news have been found in the literature. We analysed distribution of study types, research sources, reporting quality, gender bias, and national bias in online news reports by four major news outlets in USA, UK and Australia over six-months. We measured significant variation in reporting quality and observed biases in many aspects of cancer research reporting, including the types of study selected for coverage, the spectrum of cancer types, gender of scientists, and geographical source of research represented. We discuss the implications of these findings for guiding accurate, contextual reporting of cancer research, which is critical in helping the public understand complex science, appreciate the outcomes of publicly-funded research, maintain trust, and assist informed decision-making. The striking gender bias observed may compromise high-quality coverage of research by limiting diversity of opinion, reinforces stereotypes and skews public visibility and recognition towards male scientists. Our findings provide useful guidelines for scientists and journalists alike to consider in providing the most informative and accurate reporting of research.
新闻中的癌症研究往往与夸大和不准确的报道有关，这可能会产生虚假的希望和期望。对于与癌症相关的新闻报道，研究选择的作用是一个重要但较少被承认的问题，因为初级研究的结果通常不如荟萃分析和系统评价可靠。很少有研究调查过成为新闻的研究质量，也没有发现文献中对新闻中初级研究和二级研究比例的先前分析。我们分析了美国、英国和澳大利亚四大新闻媒体在六个月内的在线新闻报道中的研究类型、研究来源、报告质量、性别偏见和国家偏见的分布。我们测量了报告质量的显著差异，并观察到癌症研究报告的许多方面存在偏见，包括选择报道的研究类型、癌症类型的范围、科学家的性别以及研究的地理来源。我们讨论了这些发现对指导癌症研究准确、背景化报告的影响，这对于帮助公众理解复杂的科学、欣赏公共资助研究的成果、保持信任和协助明智决策至关重要。观察到的明显性别偏见可能会通过限制意见的多样性来影响高质量的研究报道，强化刻板印象，并使公众对男性科学家的可见度和认可度产生偏差。我们的发现为科学家和记者提供了有用的指导，以在提供最具信息性和准确性的研究报告方面进行考虑。
