Syafhan Nadia Farhanah, Chen Gaoyun, Parsons Carole, McElnay James C
Department of Clinical Pharmacy and Social Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmacy, Universitas Indonesia, Depok, Indonesia.
Clinical and Practice Research Group, School of Pharmacy, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, BT9 7BL, UK.
J Pharm Policy Pract. 2022 Oct 15;15(1):64. doi: 10.1186/s40545-022-00462-8.
Information about how newspapers portray antidiabetic medicines to readers is lacking. This study investigated the reporting on antidiabetic medicines in the most widely circulated newspapers published in the United Kingdom (UK) and the United States (US) over a 10-year period.
The Nexis UK database was used to identify and select relevant articles. Systematic content analysis of the articles which met the inclusion criteria (articles of any format that contained reference to antidiabetic medicines) within the highest circulated newspapers in the UK and US between 2009 and 2018 was conducted. Inter-rater reliability of coding was established using a 10% sample of the identified articles.
A total of 560 (369 UK and 191 US) relevant newspaper articles were retrieved. In the UK, the number of relevant articles showed a slightly increasing trend over the study period, while in the US, article numbers declined over the study period. Safety/risk of antidiabetic medicines was the most frequent theme covered by the articles (34.6%). Over one-third of the newspaper articles were written from a clinical perspective (37.7%). Insulin was the most commonly discussed class of antidiabetic medicine (23.1%). Control of blood sugar levels (53.1%) and side effects/toxicity (92.7%) were the most frequently reported benefit and risk of antidiabetic medicines, respectively. The most frequently reported organ systems harmed by antidiabetic medicines were the cardiovascular, endocrine and gastrointestinal systems. The UK newspapers were more likely to report the benefits of antidiabetic medicines (p = 0.005), while the US articles were more likely to report on harms/risks (p = 0.001). The majority of relevant articles (91.8%) were judged as having a balanced judgement, while 8.2% of the articles were rated as exaggerated.
This study has revealed that antidiabetic medicines are indeed reported on by UK and US newspapers. As media portrayal has the potential to negatively or positively influence patients' views of their medication for diabetes, healthcare professionals should check on patients' beliefs and knowledge about their medication and proactively provide objective and balanced information (including promotion of medication adherence).
目前缺乏关于报纸如何向读者描述抗糖尿病药物的信息。本研究调查了英国(UK)和美国(US)发行最广泛的报纸在10年期间对抗糖尿病药物的报道情况。
使用Nexis UK数据库识别和选择相关文章。对2009年至2018年期间英国和美国发行量最大的报纸中符合纳入标准(任何格式且提及抗糖尿病药物的文章)的文章进行系统的内容分析。使用所识别文章的10%样本建立编码的评分者间信度。
共检索到560篇(369篇来自英国,191篇来自美国)相关报纸文章。在英国,相关文章的数量在研究期间呈略有上升趋势,而在美国,文章数量在研究期间有所下降。抗糖尿病药物的安全性/风险是文章中最常涉及的主题(34.6%)。超过三分之一的报纸文章是从临床角度撰写的(37.7%)。胰岛素是最常被讨论的抗糖尿病药物类别(23.1%)。血糖水平控制(53.1%)和副作用/毒性(92.7%)分别是抗糖尿病药物最常报道的益处和风险。抗糖尿病药物最常报道的受损害器官系统是心血管、内分泌和胃肠道系统。英国报纸更有可能报道抗糖尿病药物的益处(p = 0.005),而美国的文章更有可能报道危害/风险(p = 0.001)。大多数相关文章(91.8%)被判定具有平衡的判断,而8.2%的文章被评为夸张。
本研究表明,英国和美国的报纸确实对抗糖尿病药物进行了报道。由于媒体的描述有可能对患者对其糖尿病药物的看法产生负面或正面影响,医疗保健专业人员应检查患者对其药物的信念和知识,并积极提供客观和平衡的信息(包括促进药物依从性)。