L’Agenzia Italiana del Farmaco – Italy’s national drug regulatory agency – published a profile of our work on their website. The web article was entitled, “Come leggere criticamente le notizie sulla salute: l’esperienza di HealthNewsReview.org” – or – “How to critically read the news about health: the experience of HealthNewsReview.org.”
The article is a summary of my JAMA Internal Medicine piece from last May, “A Guide to Reading Health Care News Stories.”
The Italian article concludes:
HealthNewsReview.org provides reporters… a series of practical tools useful to distinguish background noise from the facts and provide a better service to readers. This toolkit includes, for example, a list of independent experts who have no financial ties to the industry (and the conflicts of interest arising therefrom) to turn to figure out how to provide the best interpretation of the results of scientific studies.
The activities undertaken in systematic review of the news by this courageous site have stopped (temporarily, Schwitzer hopes) because of a lack of funds. But the founder does not fail to continue to offer his views on misleading news on his blog and via his Twitter account, a lone voice that deserves to be heard.
It does, indeed, feel lonely out here many days. And the article is correct: I have now limped through 15 months of operation of the site without funding. Because of pressing family matters, I have at least temporarily stopped pursuing new funding possibilities.
So, thanks to L’Agenzia Italiana del Farmaco for this recognition of our efforts.
——————–
Follow us on Twitter:
https://twitter.com/garyschwitzer
https://twitter.com/healthnewsrevu
Opinions on other issues in news, journals, PR, advertising, marketing
@HealthNewsRevu @mcjaklevic HealthNewsReview once again revealing hype that far outstrips reality. I suspect that one day, AI will meaningfully contribute to good patient care. Whether that's in 10 years or 100, I couldn't say. What is clear is that we ain't there yet.
Comments
Please note, comments are no longer published through this website. All previously made comments are still archived and available for viewing through select posts.
Comments are closed.
Our Comments Policy
But before leaving a comment, please review these notes about our policy.
You are responsible for any comments you leave on this site.
This site is primarily a forum for discussion about the quality (or lack thereof) in journalism or other media messages (advertising, marketing, public relations, medical journals, etc.) It is not intended to be a forum for definitive discussions about medicine or science.
We will delete comments that include personal attacks, unfounded allegations, unverified claims, product pitches, profanity or any from anyone who does not list a full name and a functioning 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.
We don”t have sufficient staffing to contact each commenter who left such a message. If you have a question about why your comment was edited or removed, you can email us at feedback@healthnewsreview.org.
There has been a recent burst of attention to troubles with many comments left on science and science news/communication websites. Read “Online science comments: trolls, trash and treasure.”
The authors of the Retraction Watch comments policy urge commenters:
We”re also concerned about anonymous comments. We ask that all commenters leave their full name and provide an actual email address in case we feel we need to contact them. We may delete any comment left by someone who does not leave their name and a legitimate email address.
And, as noted, product pitches of any sort – pushing treatments, tests, products, procedures, physicians, medical centers, books, websites – are likely to be deleted. We don”t accept advertising on this site and are not going to give it away free.
The ability to leave comments expires after a certain period of time. So you may find that you’re unable to leave a comment on an article that is more than a few months old.
You might also like