Harding C M
Child Care Health Dev. 1985 Jan-Feb;11(1):21-30. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2214.1985.tb00446.x.
The coverage of whooping cough and its vaccine by the British press was content-analysed and compared with that of four other diseases for which articles were relatively common over the same time period. The results indicated that the topics were dealt with differently by the press, with whooping cough vaccination being seen as more risky than the others, requiring both medical advice and a decision before being accepted. The rather negative attitude to this vaccine emphasizes the problems associated with it rather than its preventive qualities. There was little evidence of a balanced discussion of the issues found in the medical literature, although accusations against the lay-press for providing largely inaccurate and sensationalized articles were found to be unsupported. The press were found, however, to publish many event-orientated articles, particularly those about specific individuals.
对英国媒体关于百日咳及其疫苗的报道进行了内容分析，并与同期报道相对常见的其他四种疾病的报道进行了比较。结果表明，媒体对这些主题的处理方式不同，百日咳疫苗接种被视为比其他疫苗更具风险，在接受之前需要医学建议和决定。对这种疫苗相当负面的态度强调了与之相关的问题，而不是其预防特性。几乎没有证据表明医学文献中对这些问题进行了平衡的讨论，尽管关于大众媒体提供的文章大多不准确且耸人听闻的指责被发现缺乏依据。然而，发现媒体发表了许多以事件为导向的文章，特别是那些关于特定个人的文章。
