Rapid Responses to:

REVIEWS: Gary Schwitzer How the media left the evidence out in the cold BMJ 2003; 326: 1403-1404 [Full text]

Rapid Responses: Submit a response to this article

Rapid Responses published:

Hitting the Headlines

Jon R Brassey, Mamhilad Park Estate, Pontypool NP4 0YP   (20 June 2003)

Canadian journalists view their job differently

Alan K. Cassels   (4 August 2003)

Hitting the Headlines 20 June 2003
Jon R Brassey, Director, ATTRACT Wales and Director, TRIP Database National Public Health Service, Wales, Mamhilad Park Estate, Pontypool NP4 0YP Send response to journal: Re: Hitting the Headlines	One of my favourite sections of the UK National Electronic Library for Health site (www.nelh.nhs.uk) is 'Hitting the Headlines' produced by the NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. It takes articles from the UK national press that report on issues relating to the effectiveness of an intervention. It then assesses the reliability of the claims by critically appraising the underlying research. While it cannot stop the flow of 'distorted' articles produced by the national press it can provide a useful resource for clinicians in protecting themselves from hordes of newspaper waving patients! Competing interests:   I work on a variety of projects for the NeLH - but not Hitting the Headlines.
Canadian journalists view their job differently 4 August 2003
Alan K. Cassels, Researcher, School of Health Information Science University of Victoria, Victoria, BC Canada V8W 3P5 Send response to journal: Re: Canadian journalists view their job differently	As a corollary to Gary Schwitzer's excellent case study of the flawed reporting of the 'holy-grail' cure for the common cold, BMJ readers should know that those in the media might have a decidedly different take on where their responsibility lies in reporting on new drugs. In April of this year, with a team of researchers in Canada I published an analysis of one year’s worth of Canadian newspaper reporting of five new drugs. Our report can be found in the Canadian Medical Association Journal at: http://www.cmaj.ca/cgi/content/full/168/9/1133) What surprised me most in the reporting of my study was hearing the president of the Canadian Newspaper Association, Anne Kothawala, express her concerns by our study’s conclusions—particularly, the implied doubt concerning journalistic integrity. She was critical of our finding that over two-thirds of the 193 articles we examined did not indicate a single adverse effect or side effect related to the drug being reported and she told the Chronicle of Healthcare Marketing : “the authors of the study would do well to remember what constitutes a ‘story,’” and that “to me, when a drug has passed Health Canada’s exhaustive regulatory approval process, the real story is what benefit it yields to Canadians.” So there you have it—at least in Canada, it is the job of journalists to contribute free advertising. Competing interests:   None declared