Even in a short (491-word) story, there was a good explanation of how the research was done – with appropriate caveats about how small was the study sample.
There have been so many claims made about an autism-diet link. It is important to report on new evidence in this field.
Not applicable. The story didn’t discuss costs of the diet, but that doesn’t seem particularly vital.
The story simply states that the diet free of cereal grains and dairy products did not improve symptoms.
The story explains that he researchers reported finding "no adverse changes in behavior after the snacks containing wheat, milk or both" and again emphasized that this was a small study.
First, the story emphasized that this was a small study.
Second, it explained why the "scientists say theirs is the most tightly controlled autism diet study so far." Good explanation of how the study was done.
Third, the story quoted one observer questioning what might have been found if the study had been tweaked a bit.
No disease-mongering. A sidebar gives prevalence estimates and cites the source of the statistics.
The story turned to one pediatrician, who, while having trained with the lead researcher, also raised a question about the study.
Not applicable. There really wasn’t a new approach being tested.
The story explains that "up to a third of children with autism are put on special diets like the one tested."
The story makes clear that this is one of several studies that have been done on questions of an autism-diet link.
It’s clear that the story did not rely solely on a news release.