Gesundung der Gesundheitsberichterstattung

Die Wissenschaft befasst sich wieder einmal damit, wie wir unseren Job als MedizinjournalistInnen besser erledigen könnten: Unter dem Titel "Developing guidelines for better reporting of health research" gibt es in PLoS Medicine einen Artikel, in dem wieder einmal Richtlinien zur Gesundheitsberichterstattung vorgestellt werden. Der Rest ist aus der Presseaussendung zitiert:
The authors of the paper have been key in the development of many of the most important health research guidelines published over the past few years, including the CONSORT guidelines for clinical trials and the PRISMA guidelines for systematic reviews.
The accurate reporting of a study is key to the understanding of the importance of the study. Before the development of CONSORT, for example, there was no consensus on what must be reported in order for a reader to accurately assess the validity of a trial. Hence, even such important items such as method of randomization and the primary outcome of the trial were routinely left out, leading to studies being reported in a misleading fashion.
The authors of this report are part of a larger group of experts who have for many years been advocating for, and producing guidelines aimed at the improvement of reporting of health research. The importance of these guidelines is now increasingly recognized by the wider research community, and, moreover, they are increasingly required by journals. In addition to individual guidelines this group has also spearheaded the development of an overarching network, the EQUATOR Network, which contains most of the currently developed guidelines - http://www.equator-network.org/. This paper represents a further effort to promote better reporting" As the authors note "If reporting guidelines are to be useful and more widely disseminated, they need to be developed using robust and widely accepted methodologies.
###
Funding: No specific funding was received to write this piece. DGA is supported by Cancer Research UK, DM by a University of Ottawa Research Chair, and KFS by Family Health International.
Competing Interests:Competing interests: DM, KFS, IS, and DGA are members of the EQUATOR Network. DM, KFS, and DGA are members of the CONSORT executive. DM and DGA are members of the PRISMA executive. DM is on the Editorial Board of PLoS Medicine.
Citation: Moher D, Schulz KF, Simera I, Altman DG (2010) Guidance for Developers of Health Research Reporting Guidelines. PLoS Med 7(2): e1000217.doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000217.
IN YOUR COVERAGE PLEASE USE THIS URL TO PROVIDE ACCESS TO THE FREELY AVAILABLE PAPER: http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pmed.1000217
GueSt - 17. Feb, 10:00

Quellenkritik

Diese Guidelines sind nicht für Journalisten gedacht, sondern für Forscher, die in Journalen publizieren.

Trotzdem super hierhergehöriger Hinweis weil:

Es gibt ja mittlerweile mehrere Menschen, die die Qualität von journalistischer Medizingeschichten an einem ganz speziellen Maßstab der Wissenschaft messen. Siehe zb Schwitzer (http://www.healthnewsreview.org/) und Konsorten.
Geht es nach denen, dann ist nur gut, wer Studienreports getreulich übersetzt.*

Und jetzt das: Der im PLoS zitierte Glasziou meint, dass 41 von 80 Reports inadequate waren. Und, so der PLoS Bericht weiter:

This is just one of numerous examples of a large and disturbing literature indicating the general failure in the quality of reporting health research

Made my
Spaday

* Ich überspitze, aber es ist schon so, dass die journalismus-spezifischen Kriterien in der Minderheit sind.