How is chronic non-communicable respiratory conditions research reported in European newspapers? An impact assessment for policy

Abstract

Background: Newspapers are an important means for the communication of medical research findings to policy-makers and the public, but may distort their views on the relative importance of research into, and burden from, different respiratory diseases. Methods: A systematic search strategy based on respiratory-related keywords was developed and translated into 15 European languages to identify relevant stories in 26 newspapers from eight countries in 2002-2013. Details of the stories were recorded on Excel and coded based on the reported respiratory conditions (asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and other) and research types. Each cited research study was identified on the Web of Science and downloaded for analysis. Findings: There were far more stories about asthma than on COPD, although the amount of research was only modestly greater, and the disease burden far less. Epidemiology, lifestyle and genetics research received the most media attention but not in all newspapers, while means of diagnosis and quality of life were under-reported in all newspapers. Journalists tended to over-cite research from their country by a factor averaging four times more than other researchers. About 10% of stories included a quote from a commentator, especially those in the two UK newspapers, with most of the quotes from UK charities. Conclusions: The balance between disease areas reported in European newspaper stories is very misleading. European policy-makers and public may perceive asthma as more burdensome than it is and COPD much less. The study also showed that UK charities, but not those in other European countries, gained significant publicity from their contributions to these stories.