How can journalists do a better job reporting on the principles of shared decision making

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter (peer-reviewed)

Abstract

The news media have the potential to dramatically affect the public dialogue about health care, the clinical encounter between patients and physicians, and individual decision making. That has been the motivation for the HealthNewsReview.org project since 2006, a project that reviews health care news stories that include claims of efficacy about health care interventions. A team of reviewers has evaluated nearly 2,000 such stories and found that the majority fail to address five leading questions that consumers need answered about the tradeoffs involved in health care choices. Fixing these flaws is not difficult, but requires a different editorial management mindset and a better connection between messengers and consumers.
Original languageEnglish (US)
Title of host publicationShared Decision Making in Health Care
EditorsGlyn Elwyn, Adrian Edwards, Rachel Thompson
PublisherOxford University Press, Inc
StateAccepted/In press - 2016

Fingerprint

Decision Making
Delivery of Health Care
Motivation
Physicians

Cite this

Schwitzer, G. J. (Accepted/In press). How can journalists do a better job reporting on the principles of shared decision making. In G. Elwyn, A. Edwards, & R. Thompson (Eds.), Shared Decision Making in Health Care Oxford University Press, Inc.

How can journalists do a better job reporting on the principles of shared decision making. / Schwitzer, Gary J.

Shared Decision Making in Health Care. ed. / Glyn Elwyn; Adrian Edwards; Rachel Thompson. Oxford University Press, Inc, 2016.

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter (peer-reviewed)

Schwitzer, GJ 2016, How can journalists do a better job reporting on the principles of shared decision making. in G Elwyn, A Edwards & R Thompson (eds), Shared Decision Making in Health Care. Oxford University Press, Inc.
Schwitzer GJ. How can journalists do a better job reporting on the principles of shared decision making. In Elwyn G, Edwards A, Thompson R, editors, Shared Decision Making in Health Care. Oxford University Press, Inc. 2016
Schwitzer, Gary J. / How can journalists do a better job reporting on the principles of shared decision making. Shared Decision Making in Health Care. editor / Glyn Elwyn ; Adrian Edwards ; Rachel Thompson. Oxford University Press, Inc, 2016.
@inbook{9291401bc7fc4cf9a27b4719079af605,
title = "How can journalists do a better job reporting on the principles of shared decision making",
abstract = "The news media have the potential to dramatically affect the public dialogue about health care, the clinical encounter between patients and physicians, and individual decision making. That has been the motivation for the HealthNewsReview.org project since 2006, a project that reviews health care news stories that include claims of efficacy about health care interventions. A team of reviewers has evaluated nearly 2,000 such stories and found that the majority fail to address five leading questions that consumers need answered about the tradeoffs involved in health care choices. Fixing these flaws is not difficult, but requires a different editorial management mindset and a better connection between messengers and consumers.",
author = "Schwitzer, {Gary J}",
year = "2016",
language = "English (US)",
editor = "Glyn Elwyn and Adrian Edwards and Rachel Thompson",
booktitle = "Shared Decision Making in Health Care",
publisher = "Oxford University Press, Inc",

}

TY - CHAP

T1 - How can journalists do a better job reporting on the principles of shared decision making

AU - Schwitzer, Gary J

PY - 2016

Y1 - 2016

N2 - The news media have the potential to dramatically affect the public dialogue about health care, the clinical encounter between patients and physicians, and individual decision making. That has been the motivation for the HealthNewsReview.org project since 2006, a project that reviews health care news stories that include claims of efficacy about health care interventions. A team of reviewers has evaluated nearly 2,000 such stories and found that the majority fail to address five leading questions that consumers need answered about the tradeoffs involved in health care choices. Fixing these flaws is not difficult, but requires a different editorial management mindset and a better connection between messengers and consumers.

AB - The news media have the potential to dramatically affect the public dialogue about health care, the clinical encounter between patients and physicians, and individual decision making. That has been the motivation for the HealthNewsReview.org project since 2006, a project that reviews health care news stories that include claims of efficacy about health care interventions. A team of reviewers has evaluated nearly 2,000 such stories and found that the majority fail to address five leading questions that consumers need answered about the tradeoffs involved in health care choices. Fixing these flaws is not difficult, but requires a different editorial management mindset and a better connection between messengers and consumers.

M3 - Chapter (peer-reviewed)

BT - Shared Decision Making in Health Care

A2 - Elwyn, Glyn

A2 - Edwards, Adrian

A2 - Thompson, Rachel

PB - Oxford University Press, Inc

ER -