(4 stars) A healthy skeptic perspective on arthritis pain creams, emphasizing, for the most part, "there’s no good evidence that any over-the-counter rub or cream offers real relief” according to one source.
(4 stars) An engaging and important enterprise story that highlights the tension that exists in the development of new and presumably less invasive approaches to cardiac catheterization and angioplasty.
(3 stars) Story implies that hormone therapy is one size fits all. In fact this study was about different risks from different hormone therapies. Story also missed key points about the study design.
(3 stars) While the story meets many of our criteria, we find 2 big gaps. It didn’t mention that the same researchers reported an opposite outcome not long ago and it didn’t provide the actual rates of cancer.
(2 stars) The story touts "a new cream that promises instant anti-impotence with no side effects." We’re talking about a study in 10 rats. Enough said. Read on for the rodent details.
(2 stars) The story touts "a new cream that promises instant anti-impotence with no side effects." We’re talking about a study in 10 rats. Enough said. Read on for the rodent details.
(2 stars) This is not the way journalism should cover new medical devices. The story failed to scrutinize evidence, discuss potential harms or costs, or seek independent perspectives.
(3 stars) Even though the research is intriguing and the news story may be tongue-in-cheek, the implication of benefit to people – not mice- is misleading.
(3 stars) Good job on the main point: that a single dose of the H1N1 flu vaccine may be effective enough that the initial plan to give people two doses won’t be necessary. Read on about some of our concerns.
(3 stars) Health care reform discussions need to start somewhere, and perhaps starting with $149 per person charges for tests of unclear benefit is one of many places to start. The story could have said that.
(5 stars) This story reminds readers that its subject is a new drug in early testing and its true efficacy is currently unknown. Defining “response” in this study and detailing harms would have helped.
(4 stars)
(4 stars)
