Interpretation of Health News Items Reporting Results of Randomized Controlled Trials With or Without Spin: A Randomized Controlled Trial Among English-speaking Population
试验速览
- 阶段
- 不适用
- 状态
- 撤回
- 试验地点
- 2
- 主要终点
- Perception of beneficial effect of the treatment X
研究概览
简要总结
The main objective of this study is to compare the interpretation of health news items reporting results of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with or without spin (i.e., distortion of research results). The news items which reported those studies evaluating the treatment effect, having highest number of spin in the headline and text and received high online public attention will be selected. Spin will be deleted and will rewrite the news items without spin. This sample of news items reporting results of RCTs with and without spin will be interpreted by English-speaking population.
详细描述
Health news is an important way to communicate updated medical research to the public. News items reporting the results of medical research attract a large audience. However, the quality of reporting in health news is questionable. The merits of a wide range of treatments and tests are overplayed and harms are underplayed. Several studies have shown the presence of spin (i.e., distorted presentation of study results) in health news. Distorted facts can be misleading and can affect the behaviour of physicians, healthcare providers and patients. However, little research has assessed whether spin can affect readers' interpretation of health news items.
Objective
"Spin" is defined as a misrepresentation of study results whatever the motive (intentionally or unintentionally) to highlight that the beneficial effect of the intervention in terms of efficacy and safety is greater than that shown by the results. To compare the interpretation of health news items reporting RCTs with or without spin. News items evaluating the effect of a pharmacological treatment that received high online public attention will be focused.
Hypothesis
The hypothesis of this study is that the spin can influence the reader's interpretation of health news items reporting results of RCTs.
Design: A randomized controlled trial
- Interventions: Health news items reporting results of RCTs with and without spin will be compared. A sample of health news items reporting the results of RCTs evaluating the effect of pharmacologic treatment and containing highest number of spin in the headline and text will be selected. Spin will be deleted in the selected news items and will be rewritten the news items without spin.
- Participants: The participants will include English-speaking population from FindParticipants.
- Sample size will be 300 patients.
- The primary outcome will be perception of beneficial effect of the treatment X. We will ask participants, what do you think is the probability that treatment X would be beneficial to patients? (scale, 0 [very unlikely] to 10 [very likely]). Perception of safety and beneficial effects of treatment in clinical studies is considered as a surrogate marker of health outcome as it may have an impact on the future development of the drug, and then the potential use of the drug for patients.
- This study is approved by ethics review regulations by INSERM (CEEI-IRB): IRB00003888
研究设计
- 研究类型
- Interventional
- 分配方式
- Randomized
- 干预模型
- Parallel
- 主要目的
- Other
- 盲法
- Single (Participant)
盲法说明
Participants will be blinded to the study hypothesis.
入排标准
- 年龄范围
- 18 Years 至 —（Adult, Older Adult）
- 性别
- All
- 接受健康志愿者
- 是
入选标准
- •Native English speakers or have a very good level in reading and understanding of English language
排除标准
- 未提供
结局指标
主要结局
Perception of beneficial effect of the treatment X
时间窗: As the intervention is assigned (reading the news item) i.e., 1-2 hours
We will ask participants, what do you think is the probability that treatment X would be beneficial to patients? With the choices of answers on a 10 point Likert scale, (scale, 0 \[very unlikely\] to 10 \[very likely\])
次要结局
- Do you think this treatment should be offered to patients in the short term?(As the intervention is assigned (reading the news item) i.e., 1-2 hours)
- Do you think this treatment will make a difference in the existing clinical practice?(As the intervention is assigned (reading the news item) i.e., 1-2 hours)
- Perception of efficacy, safety, availability and clinical utility of the treatment X in existing clinical practice(As the intervention is assigned (reading the news item) i.e., 1-2 hours)
- How safe do you think that treatment X would be for patients?(As the intervention is assigned (reading the news item) i.e., 1-2 hours)
研究者
Isabelle BOUTRON
Professor
Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris