Two sequential National Cancer Institute surveys showed that more women perceived forty years rather than fifty years to be the right age for mammography screening, despite the lack of scientific evidence for this position. News media coverage of mammography guidelines regarding women in their forties was compared with the survey perceptions. Women’s understanding of forty years as the right age did not correspond to the proportion of topical news content. Qualitative interviews with eight magazine health journalists illustrated the emphasis on practical recommendations over scientific knowledge. Understanding scientific evidence would enhance health reporting to create an informed public.
American Cancer Society. 2005. Cancer facts-figures 2005. Atlanta, GA: American Cancer Society. http://seer.cancer.gov/csr/1975_2002/results_single/sect_01_table.01.pdf.
2.
American Institute for Preventive Medicine. 2005. Medical self-care: How to be a better health care consumer. http://www.healthy.net/aipm/store/CategoryInfo.sap?CatCode=2&SubCatCode=0.
3.
Andsager, J. L., and A. Powers. 1999. Social or economic concerns: How news and women’s magazines framed breast cancer in the 1990s. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly76:531-541.
4.
Blumenthal, H. T.1998. Doctors, media and the quest for immortality. St. Louis Journalism Review28:14-15.
5.
Brainard, J.2004. How sound is Bush’s “sound science”?Chronicle of Higher Education50:A18-A20.
6.
Breast Cancer Action. 2005. Mammography screening and new technologies. http://www.bcaction.org/Pages/GetInformed/MammographyAndNewTech.html.
7.
Burke, W., A. H. Olsen, L. E. Pinsky, S. E. Reynolds, and N. A. Press. 2001. Misleading presentation of breast cancer in popular magazines. American Society of Internal Medicine4:58-64.
8.
Carter, L.2002. Medicine in the media. USA Today Magazine131:60-62.
9.
Chew, F., S. Palmer, and S. Kim. 1995. Source of information and knowledge about health and nutrition: Can viewing one television program make a difference?Public Understanding of Science4:17-29.
10.
Dodd, G. D.1993. American Cancer Society guidelines from the past to the present. Cancer72:1519-1521.
11.
Eggener, S.1998. The power of the pen: Medical journalism and public awareness. JAMA279:1400.
12.
Elmore, J. G., K. Armstrong, C. D. Lehman, and S. W. Fletcher. 2005. Screening for breast cancer. JAMA293:125-156.
13.
Ernster, V. L.1997. Mammography screening for women aged 40 through 49. A guidelines saga and clarion call for informed decision making. American Journal of Public Health87:1103-1106.
14.
Fletcher, S. W.1995. Why question screening mammography for women in their forties?Radiologic Clinics of North America33:1259-1271.
15.
Fletcher, S. W., W. Black, R. Harris, B. K. Rimer, and S. Shapiro. 1993. Report of the international workshop on screening for breast cancer. Journal of the National Cancer Institute85:1644-1656.
16.
Friedman, S. M., S. Dunwoody, and C. L. Rogers. 1999. Communicating uncertainty: Media coverage of new and controversial science. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
17.
Gallup Organization. 2002. Gallup poll September 2002 on health-related questions. Kaisernetwork.org’s Health Poll Search. http://www.ropercenter.ucon...Xqt0Gf/HAHTpage/study_link?STDY_ID=25465.
18.
Gregorio, D. I.1999. Refutation and conjecture around consensus breast cancer screening guidelines. Journal of Public Health Management and Practice5:91-98.
19.
Griffin, R. J.1999. Using systematic thinking to choose and evaluate evidence. In Communicating uncertainty: Media coverage of new and controversial science, edited by S. M. Friedman, S. Dunwoody, and C. L. Rogers, 225-248. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
20.
Holtz, A.S.2001. When should the public be informed of the results of medical research?Journal of the American Medical Association289:2944-2945.
21.
Irwig, L., N. Houssami, and C. van Vliet. 2004. New technologies in screening for breast cancer: A systematic review of their accuracy. British Journal of Cancer90:2118-2122.
22.
Kerlikowske, K.1997. Efficacy of screening mammography among women aged 40 to 49 years and 50 to 69 years: Comparison of relative and absolute benefit. Journal of the National Cancer Institute Monograph22:79-86.
23.
Kerlikowske, K., D. Grady, S. M. Rubin, C. Sandrock, and V. L. Ernster. 1995. Efficacy of screening mammography. A meta-analysis. JAMA273:149-154.
24.
Lantz, J. C., and W. L. Lanier. 2002. Observations from the Mayo Clinic National Conference on Medicine and the Media. Mayo Clinic Proceedings77:1306-1311.
25.
Lerner, B. H.2001. The breast cancer wars: Hope, fear and the pursuit of a cure in twentieth-century America. New York: Oxford University Press.
26.
Lerner, B. H.2002. What’s behind it all?The Washington Post, March 3.
27.
Logan, R. A.1991. Popularization versus secularization: Media coverage of health. In Risky business: Communicating issues of salience, risk and public policy, edited by L. Wilkins and P. Patterson, 43-59. New York: Greenwood.
28.
Mayo Clinic. 2002.Mayo Clinic National Conference on Medicine and the Media: Press release, September 26, 2002. http://www.newswise.com/articles/2002/9/MEDCONF.MMC.html.
29.
Miller, A. B.1994. Mammography in women under 50. Hematology/Oncology Clinics of North America8:165-177.
30.
Morrison, A. S., J. Brisson, and N. Khalid. 1988. Breast cancer incidence and mortality in the Breast Cancer Detection Demonstration Project. Journal of National Cancer Institute80:1540-1547.
31.
National Cancer Institute. 1997. Content analysis of media coverage of NCI’s new mammography recommendations May 1998. Bethesda, MD: National Cancer Institute, Office of Communications.
32.
2005a. What you need to know about breast cancer. Screening mammogram. http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/wyntk/breast/page5 (Accessed Dec 29, 2005).
33.
National Cancer Institute. 2005b. Genetics of breast and ovarian cancer. General information. http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/pdq/genetics/breast-and-ovarian/healthprofessional%23Section_2.
34.
2005c. Cancer FactSheet. Screening Mammograms: Questions and Answers. http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/Detection/screening-mammograms (Accessed Dec 29, 2005).
35.
National Cancer Institute. 1997a. Breast cancer screening for women ages 40-49. NIH consensus statement no. 103. http://consensus.nih.gov/cons/103/103_statement.htm.
36.
National Cancer Institute. 1997b. National Cancer Advisory Board issues mammography screening recommendations. Press release. http://www.nih.gov/news/pr/mar97/nci-27b.htm.
37.
National Cancer Institute. 2005. About the consensus programs, NIH Consensus Development Program. http://consensus.nih.gov/about/about.htm.
38.
Rensberger, B.1997. Covering science for newspapers. In A field guide for science writers, edited by D. Blum and M. Knudson, 7-16. New York: Oxford University Press.
39.
Ringash, J.2001. Preventive health care, 2001 update: Screening mammography among women aged 40-49 years at average risk of breast cancer. Canadian Medical Association Journal164:469-476.
40.
Sackett, D. L., S. E. Straus, W. S. Richardson, W. Rosenberg, and R. B. Haynes. 2000. Evidence-based medicine. 2d ed.New York: Churchill Livingstone.
41.
Sanders, L.2003. Medicine’s progress, one setback at a time. The New York Times Magazine, March 16, 2003, 29-31.
42.
Schellenbach, J.1997. American Cancer Society response to National Cancer Institute recommendation on screening mammography and President Clinton’s pledge to support new guidelines. http://www.cancer.org/docroot/MED/content/MED_2_1X_American_Cancer_Society_Response_To_National_Cancer_Institute_Recommendation_On_Screening.asp.
43.
Schwartz, L. M., and S. Woloshin. 2002a. Marketing medicine to the public: A reader’s guide. JAMA287:774-775.
44.
Schwartz, L. M., and S. Woloshin. 2002b. News media coverage of screening mammography for women in their 40s and tamoxifen for primary prevention of breast cancer. JAMA287:3136-3142.
45.
Shoemaker, P., and S. Reese. 1996. Mediating the message: Theories of influence on mass media content. 2d ed.White Plains, NY: Longman.
46.
Smigel, K.1992. New data suggest fewer mammograms for younger, older women. Journal of the National Cancer Institute84:1860-1862.
47.
Stolberg, S. G.2002. Study says clinical guides often hide ties of doctors. The New York Times, February 6, 2002.
48.
Tate, J. 2004.Wrappedup in pink ribbon: The mediated construction of breast cancer reality. Presented at the annual conference of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, Toronto.
49.
U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. 2002. Screening for breast cancer: Recommendations and rationale. Annals of Internal Medicine137:344-346.
50.
van Trigt, A. M., L. T. de Jong-van den Berg, F. M. Haaijer-Ruskamp, J. Willems, and T. F. Tromp. 1994. Journalists and their sources of ideas and information on medicine. Social Science-Medicine38:637-643.
51.
Wazana, A.2000. Physicians and the pharmaceutical industry. JAMA283:373-380.
52.
Wells, J., P. Marshall, B. Crawley, and K. Dickersin. 2001. Newspaper reporting of screening mammography. Annals of Internal Medicine135:1029-1037.
53.
Woloshin, S., and L. M. Schwartz. 2002. Press releases: Translating research into news. JAMA287:2856-2858.
54.
Zehr, S. C.1999. Scientists’ representations of uncertainty. In Communicating uncertainty: Media coverage of new and controversial science, edited by S. M Friedman, S. Dunwoody, and C. L. Rogers, 3-22. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
