This story provided a rosier picture of the benefit than was warranted. The appropriate overall survival statistic to report would have been the median survival rate in the entire population, not the average survival.
Inclusion of potential harms and more expert context elevate this story above the competing USA Today version.
Not a bad effort — but not quite as thorough as a competing NPR story on the same study.
Relying excessively on a news release, this story missed an opportunity to explore an issue with important implications for patients and the health care system.
This story sends readers off with the right take-home message, but could have done with a few more caveats and a better look at the big picture regarding the role of amyloid in Alzheimer’s disease.
This story has many of the same problems as the news release we reviewed on this topic.
We like the way this story frames a less-invasive lung cancer test in terms of reduced costs and harms. But the piece really needed an independent expert to help sort out the evidence and provide context.
Spoonfeeding research to journalists on a conference call, before it’s been peer-reviewed or published, leads to incomplete reports such as this one.