(5 stars) This story reports on one of only 6 studies highlighted by the American Society of Clinical Oncology out of more than 4,000 abstracts posted online a month in advance of its annual meeting. – at least had one important balancing cautious perspective.
(5 stars) This was a solid, succinct report on an issue that has received – and will undoubtedly continue to generate – a lot of attention, including a lot of misinformation.
(0 stars) Maybe CNN should add a minute or two to its feature. You may not be able to address all of our criteria in a minute, but you should be able to address SOME of them.
(0 stars) A story on an unpublished study about to be – but not yet – presented in a talk at a meeting, funded by a drug company and coming straight out of a medical center news release. Swing and a miss.
(4 stars) Even though the story addressed many of our criteria, we’re left wondering how newsworthy is a study in which only 16 people got the active treatment.
