On the HealthNewsReview.org website which I publish we try to support excellence in health and medical journalism. But several recent stories by major news organizations caught out eye for how far short of excellence they fell.

Our review of a U.S. News & World Report story on knee replacement concluded: “ Unfortunately, in the absence of a balanced view of surgery’s pros and cons and an independent voice (the sole source is an enthusiastic surgeon), the story finally feels more like a puff piece for a top-rated hospital than a balanced look at a medical problem.”

Our review of a Boston Herald story on cooling of cardiac arrest victims to save brain cells stated, “Overall, this was a story of high human interest that was lacking in any meaningful discussion of evidence for benefits or harms, a lack of clarity about the population for whom this is intended, and too strong a focus on the product of one specific company.”

Time magazine reported on a “molecular ‘paint’ that coats cancer cells so doctors can see the wayward cells that they may otherwise miss.” We said: “while the story did transmit the excitement about a new technology that might be useful during cancer surgery, it failed to provide balance with reasonable caution about over-optimism engendered by such pre-clinical findings limited to lab animals.”

And the NBC Today show reported that “A revolutionary, new experimental technology may be a life saver for thousands of people who need a new heart and just can’t get a transplant.” But our review concluded: “the story is long on hyperbole and short on (in fact, almost completely devoid of) any facts, data or evidence about how well the device in question works, how safe it is, etc. …
All we get is the rosy story of one patient (only 6 months post-implant) of one clinical investigator at one medical center. The story needed independent perspectives, and a better review of the pitfalls of past devices, in order to come close to being a helpful or complete story.”

We’ve now reviewed 400 stories in the past 15 months on HealthNewsReview.org. Some are much better, including those we’ve given our top scores.