Category: Your Health Matters

(2 stars)
Until there is evidence of high surgery rates from more clinics and solid evidence that these operations are caused by over-training, this article could be raising unfounded alarm.

(4 stars)
In the space of less than 600 words, this story meets most of the criteria for a well constructed and objective report.

(3 stars)
This story reports on studies of a drug for aggressive prostate cancer. It overstates the importance of early research, garbles the findings, and exaggerates the benefits.

(4 stars)
This story responsibly conveyed the key findings and provided a clear take-home message to viewers. But it should have mentioned absolute risks, side effects and costs.

(3 stars)
The story didn’t mention the possible harms and shortcomings of the procedure, didn’t explain that the procedure may never be approved in the U.S., and didn’t interview any independent experts.

(1 star)
First, we give our best wishes to Mr. Lewis. But the principles of sound journalism are not suspended just because a reporter reports on his own illness. This story violated many of those principles.

(2 stars)
This story, a response to actress Christina Applegate’s diagnosis with breast cancer, was thin on evidence.  And it gave viewers recommendations on screening that are not supported by the evidence. 

(5 stars)
This is solid reporting on the new prostate cancer screening recommendation of the US Preventive Services Task Force – giving statistics and various experts’ perspectives to help readers.

But some researchers say the finding fails to establish cause-and-effect.
Source: HealthDay

Study finds despite hazards, many put themselves at increased risk for second malignancies.
Source: HealthDay

Screening could work best for early-stage patients who don’t yet need dialysis, study says.
Source: HealthDay

Source: National Institute on Drug Abuse