Cited by 500Pharmaceutical industry and healthcareJournalism and Media StudiesPatient-Provider Communication in Healthcare

Coverage by the news media of the benefits and risks of medications

Open access
Moynihan, Ray, Bero, Lisa, Ross-Degnan, Dennis, Henry, David, Lee, Kirby, Watkins, Judy, Mah, Connie, Soumerai, Stephen B.·2000·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The news media are an important source of information about new medical treatments, but there is concern that some coverage may be inaccurate and overly enthusiastic. METHODS: We studied coverage by U.S. news media of the benefits and risks of three medications that are used to prevent major diseases. The medications were pravastatin, a cholesterol-lowering drug for the prevention of cardiovascular disease; alendronate, a bisphosphonate for the treatment and prevention of osteoporosis; and aspirin, which is used for the prevention of cardiovascular disease. We analyzed a systematic probability sample of 180 newspaper articles (60 for each drug) and 27 television reports that appeared between 1994 and 1998. RESULTS: Of the 207 stories, 83 (40 percent) did not report benefits quantitatively. Of the 124 that did, 103 (83 percent) reported relative benefits only, 3 (2 percent) absolute benefits only, and 18 (15 percent) both absolute and relative benefits. Of the 207 stories, 98 (47 percent) mentioned potential harm to patients, and only 63 (30 percent) mentioned costs. Of the 170 stories citing an expert or a scientific study, 85 (50 percent) cited at least one expert or study with a financial tie to a manufacturer of the drug that had been disclosed in the scientific literature. These ties were disclosed in only 33 (39 percent) of the 85 stories. CONCLUSIONS: News-media stories about medications may include inadequate or incomplete information about the benefits, risks, and costs of the drugs as well as the financial ties between study groups or experts and pharmaceutical manufacturers.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1056/nejm200006013422206

Cites

38 of 38 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Media outlets may spin and encourage dissemination of eye-catching, potentially overstated, inaccurate, and/or misleading headlines in order to gain larger audience size.

    “Media outlets may spin [26–28] and encourage dissemination of eye-catching, potentially overstated, inaccurate [29], and/or misleading headlines in order to gain larger audience size [28, 30, 31].”

    From Causal language and strength of inference in academic and media articles shared in social media (CLAIMS): A systematic review (2018) · cites this paper as [30]

    The Conclusions (page unavailable) describe prior evidence of inaccurate coverage, overstatement, and sensationalism; the Results (page unavailable) show that medication stories often reported relative benefits without absolute benefits. These passages support concern about slanted coverage, but the paper does not establish that outlets disseminated misleading headlines to gain a larger audience. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. [12]12. Loo LK, Byrne JM, Hardin SB, Castro D, Fisher FP. Reporting med- ical information: does the lay press get it right? J Gen Intern Med 1998; 13:Suppl 1:60. abstract.
  2. [23]23. JAMA instructions for authors. JAMA 1999;281:12-20.
  3. [31]31. HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors: systemic. In: USP dispensing infor- mation. Vol. 1. Drug information for the health care professional. Engle- wood, Colo.: Micromedex, 1999:1647-51.
  4. [32]32. Snedecor GW, Cochran WG. Statistical methods. 7th ed. Ames: Iowa State University Press, 1980.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Moynihan, R., Bero, L., Ross-Degnan, D., Henry, D., Lee, K., Watkins, J., Mah, C., & Soumerai, S. B.
Affiliations
  • Harvard University (US)
  • University of California, San Francisco (US)
  • University of Newcastle Australia (AU)
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
2000-06
Volume
342
Issue
22
Pages
1645-1650
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W2324740040
Cited by
500
References
38
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 21 · 2020: 25 · 2019: 24 · 2018: 27 · 2017: 20 · 2016: 23 · 2015: 20 · 2014: 26 · 2013: 21 · 2012: 20
FWCI
15.65
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • New England Journal of Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Digital Access to Scholarship at Harvard (DASH) (Harvard University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion)
  • DigitalGeorgetown (Georgetown University Library) (submittedVersion)
  • NOVA (University of Newcastle Australia) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Pharmacology › Pharmaceutical industry and healthcare
  • Social Sciences › Communication › Journalism and Media Studies
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
Keywords
news media coverage, drug benefits and risks, pravastatin, alendronate, aspirin, cardiovascular disease prevention, osteoporosis prevention, pharmaceutical industry conflicts of interest, drug costs
MeSH terms
Anticholesteremic Agents, Aspirin, Cardiovascular Diseases, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Drug Therapy, Fees, Pharmaceutical, Humans, Mass Media, Newspapers as Topic, Osteoporosis, Television, United States, Conflict of Interest, Pravastatin, Journalism, Medical, Risk Assessment, Alendronate, Disclosure, Biomedical Research, Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review