"Too often medical reporters haven't been trained in the basics of understanding medical research and evidence-based medicine."
So says Gavin Yamey, senior editor at PLoS Medicine.
This isn't to say there aren't some really terrific, highly aware ones out there as well -- there most certainly are. But they are in the minority. If you agree with Gavin Yamey, the question then becomes, what's the best way to get reporters trained and who should do the training?
Should it be industry? "Advocates?" Academics? Government officials? Medical organizations? Disease organizations? Patient organizations? Should there be a mandatory "health care for dummies" class in journalism schools? The current practice, it seems, is on-the-job training.
The results (often inaccurate, sometimes slanted) are not a service to the health care information consumer (reader, viewer, listener). And there ain't no CME.
What's to be done? Clearly one path is for reporters to reach out to various sources for background -- and to make sure those sources are diverse -- thus guaranteeing a variety of opinions and avoiding undue, single-source bias.
In fact, now that I think of it, that's probably a good idea for all health care reporters -- even those with well-known and well-read bylines.
Healthcare for Dummies
Center for Medicine in the Public Interest is a nonprofit, non-partisan organization promoting innovative solutions that advance medical progress, reduce health disparities, extend life and make health care more affordable, preventive and patient-centered. CMPI also provides the public, policymakers and the media a reliable source of independent scientific analysis on issues ranging from personalized medicine, food and drug safety, health care reform and comparative effectiveness.
