The release also omitted costs and limitations of the research.
Why should parents feel “hopeful” about study showing parents adhered to schedule of acupuncture treatments? The release doesn’t say.
In order to justify a claim that SBRT should be used in people over 80 years old researchers would need comparative data showing that SBRT outcomes in this elderly population are superior to other forms of radiation and other treatments. That comparison was not a part of this study.
A discussion of cost and study limitations (including the small size of the study) would have made the release much stronger.
The cited statistic that “one out of every four women with fibroids has problems related to fertility” inflates the causal relationship between fibroids and infertility.
The release also neglects to inform readers how long the study lasted, and whether the changes were durable over the long term.
To show a benefit, the release should have provided actual weight gain in each group, not the annual projected weight gain based on a brief study.
The release doesn’t mention that the study was in mice and mice tissue until the last paragraph.
Systematic, Criteria-Driven
How to Make Sense of Medical Studies in the News by @stacyfsimon1 with a shout out to @HealthNewsRevu https://t.co/n3Xx3Z8PWj
Many examples of this documented in our reviews of university news releases @HealthNewsRevu https://t.co/r83LIdGhgN https://t.co/oQd4ZsSyG2
Tips for Understanding Studies
