Re: Before you cite a "study" or "report" here, read this.


There are two different things going on here. One is how media grab
onto a study to make "news" fodder of it without the more indepth look
that a news bite with an alarming headline doesn't allow. Two, there
are great battles among researchers while a consensus is being formed
over time and before enough of the angles of a particular question
have been explored to discover what answers best fits what can be
observed. In combination with the never ending appetite for items of
media, researchers are too often eager to get their name before the
public, especially if it adds to the image of being an expert to whom
policy makers turn.

>It reiterates much of what I have said in previous posts. In
>particular, if there is no underlying mechanism that is directly
>related to real science (for example, "nutrition" must be reducible to
>biochemistry, which then can't conflict with basic chemical laws -
>unless you want to do the experiment and demonstrate that these
>fundamental laws are incorrect), then put it aside if you can't explain
>it in a rigorous way at this point. It might be helpful in the future,
>but for now, you SHOULD NOT base important decisions on such
>studies/reports.
>
>
>Source: sciencedaily.com
>5/31/2005
>Researchers Largely At Fault For Health Risk Studies That Influence And
>Confuse The Public
>
>ATLANTA, May 23 -- The general public may not be reading the Archives
>of General Psychiatry or the New England Journal of Medicine, but they
>are basing important health care decisions and lifestyle changes on the
>research findings that these and other journals publish, particularly
>when such findings concern risk factors. Moreover, these scientific
>reports frequently are interpreted by clinicians, policy makers and the
>news media as calls to action, only later to be refuted or questioned
>by conflicting studies that may even claim serious and harmful
>consequences from those actions.
>
>"What is a risk? What is a risk factor? Are all risk factors equal?
>What is the threshold for true clinical significance? The general
>public can't be expected to understand these questions, let alone know
>the answers. Yet, ultimately, they are the ones who are most affected
>by journal articles that include words like 'risk' that even some of us
>working in research are not accurately defining," David J. Kupfer,
>M.D., the Thomas P. Detre Professor and chairman of the department of
>psychiatry at the University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, told his
>colleagues at the American Psychiatric Association Annual Meeting.
>
>Researchers must be more rigorous in how they design and conduct
>clinical studies as well as be more mindful of the language they use to
>describe their findings in the scientific literature or in writing
>reviews of other research, asserted Dr. Kupfer in a session devoted to
>discussion about risk factors in medicine and psychiatry.
>
>Dr. Kupfer is co-author of the recently published To Your Health: How
>to Understand What Research Tells Us About Risk (Oxford University
>Press, 2005).
>
>According to Dr. Kupfer, a look at the past year's newspaper headlines
>about antidepressants being linked to increased risk of suicide in
>children and adolescents exemplifies how research influences society
>and yet can paint a confusing picture.
>
>"In truth, these studies, which received much attention from the press,
>overestimated the risk and underestimated the benefit of prescribing
>antidepressants to children and teens. But clinicians and parents alike
>were at a loss to understand their meaning."
>
>"How do we sort out these contradictions?" questioned Dr. Kupfer. "We
>have a responsibility to the general public, who on a daily basis hear
>about new findings or ways to reduce risks of disease that are
>extrapolated from a study and then reported by the media. But too
>often, these reports are confusing or include data taken out of context
>and offer conflicting information about what puts us at risk for
>diseases."
>
>Dr. Kupfer believes that to advance medical science and promote public
>health, research must be both flawless and accurately presented.
>
>In order to generate more reliable and meaningful findings, Dr. Kupfer
>urges researchers to be more precise in defining, understanding and
>evaluating types of risk factors, including their statistical and
>clinical significance, and be more discerning of others' published
>results that may form the basis to their own research or can be cited
>in their own publications.
>
>"If we are rigorous in organizing, conducting, presenting and
>evaluating scientific research -- specifically psychiatric research --
>then we are taking important steps in fitting this research into the
>larger framework of discovering the causes and ways to prevent diseases
>and disorders. Researchers are on the front line of accomplishing these
>changes. We are responsible for the quality of the studies that we
>conduct and for the interpretation of our studies to the media, the
>general public and our colleagues. These new standards are aimed at
>raising the bar and will ultimately encourage well-designed and
>correctly interpreted research that will help in our shared goal of
>advancing science," said Dr. Kupfer.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Before you cite a "study" or "report" here, read this.
    ... when such findings concern risk factors. ... asserted Dr. Kupfer in a session devoted to ... But clinicians and parents alike ... in their own publications. ...
    (sci.med.nutrition)
  • Re: Before you cite a "study" or "report" here, read this.
    ... > related to real science (for example, ... > when such findings concern risk factors. ... asserted Dr. Kupfer in a session devoted to ... past affiliations with industry in *full* upon submission of papers to ...
    (sci.med.nutrition)
  • Re: Blatant CDC lie (pharma shill)
    ... The media does what the media will do, ... >for those at risk but don't use it as an excuse to create hysteria. ... miserable for two weeks when a cheap shot will keep it away. ... >than enough reason for vaccine makers to push the media to make sure ...
    (sci.med)
  • Evaluating what you hear or read.....
    ... Every day, new health studies fill the media, many of them often ... reduce the risk of heart disease, and mitigate the effects of alzheimers. ... The way health stories are usually covered by the media, ... Journals are three times more likely to publish studies of treatments ...
    (sci.med.diseases.cancer)
  • Re: Deaths at WDW & Risk
    ... While any ones death is tragic,because it make the news does not mean risk ... But the way these occurrences are reported in the media CLEARLY points ... themselves good parents if they told their 8 year old that they weren't ... how many people died inside WDW theme parks for any reason ...
    (rec.arts.disney.parks)