ABSTRACT
To evaluate the certainty and accuracy of the healthcare information provided by the mass media in Argentina, a group of senior medical students, blind to the study objectives, identified healthcare related statements transmitted through mass media. These findings were challenged against the recommendations of a group of physicians trained in evidence-based decision making (EBDM). We compared the strength and direction of the mass media recommendations with those of experts on EBDM. Eighty one recommendations/questions were identified and answered by the experts on EBDM, 15 with high, 18 with moderate, 30 with low and 18 with very low quality of evidence. Only 53% (CI95% 42-64%) of the mass media recommendations agreed with the expert recommendation in direction (for or against) and 28% (CI95% 18-39%) were classified as inappropriate (significant discrepancies both in direction and strength). Subgroup analysis revealed that 71% (CI95% 56-86%) of there commendations made by professionals in mass media agreed with experts in direction and 17% (IC95% 6-33%) were classified as inappropriate, OR = 0.35 (CI95% 0.1-1.1) compared to recommendations in mass media by non-professionals. We conclude that the healthcare information provided by mass media in Argentina is unreliable; this fact can probably have a negative impact in the health system performance and physician-patient relationship.
Subject(s)
Consumer Health Information/standards , Evidence-Based Medicine/standards , Mass Media/standards , Medical Staff, Hospital/standards , Patient Education as Topic/standards , Trust , Argentina , Cross-Sectional Studies , Decision Making , Evidence-Based Medicine/methods , Humans , Medical Staff, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Patient Education as Topic/statistics & numerical data , Students, MedicalABSTRACT
Para evaluar la confiabilidad y precisión de la información médica proporcionada por los medios de comunicación en Argentina, alumnos avanzados de medicina, que desconocían los objetivos del estudio, identificaron aseveraciones relacionadas a temas médicos transmitidas por medios de comunicación. Los hallazgos fueron contrastados con recomendaciones realizadas por médicos expertos en la toma de decisiones basada en evidencias. Las recomendaciones de los medios y las confeccionadas por los expertos fueron comparadas en relación a su fuerza y dirección. Se identificaron 81 recomendaciones/preguntas las que fueron contestadas por los expertos, 15 con alta, 18 con moderada, 30 con baja y 18 con muy baja calidad de evidencia. Solamente el 53% (IC95% 42-64%) de las recomendaciones hechas por los medios de comunicación coincidieron en la dirección (a favor o en contra de la intervención) con las realizadas por los expertos y el 28% (IC95% 18-39%) fueron calificadas como inadecuadas (diferencias significativas tanto en dirección como en fuerza). El análisis del subgrupo de recomendaciones realizadas en los medios por profesionales de la salud mostró una coincidencia en la dirección del 71% (IC95% 56-86%) con 17% (IC95% 6-33%) de recomendaciones inadecuadas, OR = 0.35 (IC95% 0.1-1.1) en relación a las no realizadas por profesionales de la salud. Se concluye que la información médica que proveen los medios de comunicación en Argentina es poco confiable, lo que posiblemente tenga un impacto negativo sobre el funcionamiento del sistema de salud y la relación de los médicos con sus pacientes.
To evaluate the certainty and accuracy of the healthcare information provided by the mass media in Argentina, a group of senior medical students, blind to the study objectives, identified healthcare related statements transmitted through mass media. These findings were challenged against the recommendations of a group of physicians trained in evidence-based decision making (EBDM). We compared the strength and direction of the mass media recommendations with those of experts on EBDM. Eighty one recommendations/questions were identified and answered by the experts on EBDM, 15 with high, 18 with moderate, 30 with low and 18 with very low quality of evidence. Only 53% (CI95% 42-64%) of the mass media recommendations agreed with the expert recommendation in direction (for or against) and 28% (CI95% 18-39%) were classified as inappropriate (significant discrepancies both in direction and strength). Subgroup analysis revealed that 71% (CI95% 56-86%) of there commendations made by professionals in mass media agreed with experts in direction and 17% (IC95% 6-33%) were classified as inappropriate, OR = 0.35 (CI95% 0.1-1.1) compared to recommendations in mass media by non-professionals. We conclude that the healthcare information provided by mass media in Argentina is unreliable; this fact can probably have a negative impact in the health system performance and physician-patient relationship.