Health News Review

This was a story on a small, short-term study, the limitations of which were not defined.

Our Review Summary

WebMD fell short of the competing LA Times story in reporting on this study.

This story gives a limited perspective on the new trial data that leave the reader thinking it probably works, without drawing the limitations into question.  The single independent comment does not deal with the study’s “science” but rather the need for new and effective treatments.


Why This Matters

Menopausal symptoms are extremely common (as stated by the writer) and bothersome.  New therapies that are non-pharmacologic are welcome, if they are effective.


Criteria

Not Satisfactory

Does the story adequately discuss the costs of the intervention?

Not Satisfactory

The story does not detail the costs of the weekly sessions of therapeutic hypnosis, which are likely to be high.

Not Satisfactory

Does the story adequately quantify the benefits of the treatment/test/product/procedure?

Not Satisfactory

The story leads by saying that “alternative therapy reduced hot flashes by as much as 74%” and later that “Women in the hypnosis group reported 74% fewer hot flashes on average, compared with 17% fewer among the other women.” But the story doesn’t explain “74% of what?” – from what to what?  That’s what’s needed in order to judge the potential scope of the benefit in terms that are most meaningful to readers.

Not Satisfactory

Does the story adequately explain/quantify the harms of the intervention?

Not Satisfactory

The story does not describe any possible harms or side effects of the alternative therapy. It does, however, mention that hormone therapy comes with its own risks. The LA Times article, by comparison, correctly states there is no known risk of hypnosis.

Not Satisfactory

Does the story seem to grasp the quality of the evidence?

Not Satisfactory

The article fails to mention any limitations in the study, such as its small study size and short duration. Furthermore, although the study was randomized, it was not double-blind. And how long did the effects last? Would patients have to undergo hypnosis for the rest of their lives to experience fewer hot flashes?

Satisfactory

Does the story commit disease-mongering?

Satisfactory

The story does not engage in disease mongering.

Not Satisfactory

Does the story use independent sources and identify conflicts of interest?

Not Satisfactory

The WebMD quotes a researcher tied to the study and the Executive Director of the North American Menopause Society (NAMS). The study was published in Menopause, which is the journal of NAMS. A comment from an independent source would have been welcome, especially if he/she discussed the study’s limitations and significance. Furthermore, any potential conflicts of interest are not mentioned.

Not Satisfactory

Does the story compare the new approach with existing alternatives?

Not Satisfactory

The story mentions hormone therapy as an effective treatment with risks, but does not go further into detail. The researcher is quoted as saying in the article, “Only hormone therapy, which many women can’t take or want to avoid, is more effective for treating the most common symptom of menopause.” But how much more effective is hormone therapy? And what exactly are the risks? The researcher also adds that therapeutic hypnosis works “as well or better” than antidepressants or other non-hormonal therapies, but it would have helped if the story specifically described the non-hormonal alternatives.

The LA Times article gave a better description of the other complementary/alternative medicine treatments.

Not Satisfactory

Does the story establish the availability of the treatment/test/product/procedure?

Not Satisfactory

It wasn’t clear whether a clinician could conduct the self-hypnosis trainings, or whether the patient needed to find another certified professional. And how were the hypnotic recordings obtained?  Towards the end, the story does include the comment about finding a qualified hypotherapist. But readers aren’t given any sense of how easy/difficult that might be.

Satisfactory

Does the story establish the true novelty of the approach?

Satisfactory

The story mentions that researchers conducted a similar trial in breast cancer patients with treatment-related symptoms. Researchers now wanted to see whether a similar approach could help women whose symptoms were related to menopause. That was good context.

Satisfactory

Does the story appear to rely solely or largely on a news release?

Satisfactory

The story does not rely on a press release. There is evidence of original reporting, with the two comments from the researcher and the NAMS director.

Total Score: 3 of 10 Satisfactory


We Welcome Comments

But please note: We will delete comments that include personal attacks, unfounded allegations, unverified facts, product pitches, profanity or any from anyone who doesn't list what appears to be an actual email address. We will also end any thread of repetitive comments. We don't give medical advice so we won't respond to questions asking for it. Please see more on our comments policy.