对2002- 2013年英国和爱尔兰报纸报道的非传染性疾病研究报道的评估

E. Pallari, Atia Sultana, C. Williams, G. Lewison
{"title":"对2002- 2013年英国和爱尔兰报纸报道的非传染性疾病研究报道的评估","authors":"E. Pallari, Atia Sultana, C. Williams, G. Lewison","doi":"10.1080/2331205X.2020.1757566","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Background: The reporting of medical research in the mass media is often the only way for the general public to learn about it, as most people do not read, nor have access to, scientific papers. Aims: We wished to map non-communicable disease (NCDs) research stories in two UK newspapers, the Daily Mail and The Guardian, and an Irish newspaper, the Irish Times, in 2002–13. Methodology: We identified relevant stories by means of the Factiva database, and obtained details of the cited research papers from the Web of Science. We compared coverage of research on five NCDs with the disease burden, and with the amount of research, in the two countries. We also analysed the sex distribution of the journalists, the researchers whose work was cited and any commentators mentioned in the stories. Results: There were 3921 stories in total (1990 in the Daily Mail, 1127 in the Irish Times, and 804 in The Guardian). Cancer and mental health disorders research attracted most attention. The other NCDs were cardiovascular disease & stroke, diabetes, and respiratory diseases. The stories tended to focus on epidemiological research, and means to reduce the risk of disease, rather than treatment. Both countries over-cited their own research, particularly Ireland. Conclusions: Coverage of the five NCDs tended to mirror the amounts and changes in the disease burden, both in time and between the two countries, notably for dementia and depression. Male researchers and commentators received more attention than females, and so reinforced existing gender stereotypes.","PeriodicalId":10470,"journal":{"name":"Cogent Medicine","volume":"97 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"An assessment of the coverage of non-communicable disease research reported in British and Irish newspapers, 2002-13\",\"authors\":\"E. Pallari, Atia Sultana, C. Williams, G. Lewison\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/2331205X.2020.1757566\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Background: The reporting of medical research in the mass media is often the only way for the general public to learn about it, as most people do not read, nor have access to, scientific papers. Aims: We wished to map non-communicable disease (NCDs) research stories in two UK newspapers, the Daily Mail and The Guardian, and an Irish newspaper, the Irish Times, in 2002–13. Methodology: We identified relevant stories by means of the Factiva database, and obtained details of the cited research papers from the Web of Science. We compared coverage of research on five NCDs with the disease burden, and with the amount of research, in the two countries. We also analysed the sex distribution of the journalists, the researchers whose work was cited and any commentators mentioned in the stories. Results: There were 3921 stories in total (1990 in the Daily Mail, 1127 in the Irish Times, and 804 in The Guardian). Cancer and mental health disorders research attracted most attention. The other NCDs were cardiovascular disease & stroke, diabetes, and respiratory diseases. The stories tended to focus on epidemiological research, and means to reduce the risk of disease, rather than treatment. Both countries over-cited their own research, particularly Ireland. Conclusions: Coverage of the five NCDs tended to mirror the amounts and changes in the disease burden, both in time and between the two countries, notably for dementia and depression. Male researchers and commentators received more attention than females, and so reinforced existing gender stereotypes.\",\"PeriodicalId\":10470,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cogent Medicine\",\"volume\":\"97 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cogent Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/2331205X.2020.1757566\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cogent Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/2331205X.2020.1757566","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:大众媒体对医学研究的报道往往是公众了解医学研究的唯一途径,因为大多数人既不阅读也无法接触到科学论文。目的:我们希望绘制2002 - 2013年英国两份报纸《每日邮报》和《卫报》以及爱尔兰报纸《爱尔兰时报》上的非传染性疾病(NCDs)研究报道。方法:我们通过Factiva数据库识别相关报道,并从Web of Science获取被引研究论文的详细信息。我们将这两个国家五种非传染性疾病的研究覆盖面与疾病负担和研究数量进行了比较。我们还分析了新闻记者、工作被引用的研究人员以及报道中提到的评论员的性别分布。结果:共3921篇报道(《每日邮报》1990篇,《爱尔兰时报》1127篇,《卫报》804篇)。癌症和精神健康障碍的研究最受关注。其他非传染性疾病是心血管疾病和中风、糖尿病和呼吸系统疾病。这些报道往往侧重于流行病学研究,以及降低疾病风险的方法,而不是治疗方法。这两个国家都过度引用了自己的研究,尤其是爱尔兰。结论:五种非传染性疾病的覆盖率往往反映了疾病负担的数量和变化,无论是在时间上还是在两国之间,尤其是痴呆症和抑郁症。男性研究人员和评论员比女性获得了更多的关注,因此强化了现有的性别刻板印象。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
An assessment of the coverage of non-communicable disease research reported in British and Irish newspapers, 2002-13
Abstract Background: The reporting of medical research in the mass media is often the only way for the general public to learn about it, as most people do not read, nor have access to, scientific papers. Aims: We wished to map non-communicable disease (NCDs) research stories in two UK newspapers, the Daily Mail and The Guardian, and an Irish newspaper, the Irish Times, in 2002–13. Methodology: We identified relevant stories by means of the Factiva database, and obtained details of the cited research papers from the Web of Science. We compared coverage of research on five NCDs with the disease burden, and with the amount of research, in the two countries. We also analysed the sex distribution of the journalists, the researchers whose work was cited and any commentators mentioned in the stories. Results: There were 3921 stories in total (1990 in the Daily Mail, 1127 in the Irish Times, and 804 in The Guardian). Cancer and mental health disorders research attracted most attention. The other NCDs were cardiovascular disease & stroke, diabetes, and respiratory diseases. The stories tended to focus on epidemiological research, and means to reduce the risk of disease, rather than treatment. Both countries over-cited their own research, particularly Ireland. Conclusions: Coverage of the five NCDs tended to mirror the amounts and changes in the disease burden, both in time and between the two countries, notably for dementia and depression. Male researchers and commentators received more attention than females, and so reinforced existing gender stereotypes.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Factors associated with uptake of community client-led ART delivery model at Mulago adult HIV clinic _ Mulago National Referral Hospital Malaria interventions and control programes in Sub-Saharan Africa: A narrative review Quantitative assessment of specific serum IgGs may verify source of environmental exposure in extrinsic allergic alveolitis (EAA) Divergence in fertility levels and patterns of muslim-majority countries of maghreb and middle/West Africa Exploration of how to make the collaborative planning process work - a grounded theory study
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1