To observe the observations on observational research: how do Italian online media report about a contemporary mainstream observational study?

BACKGROUND: The media's key role in conveying health information to the public is not always supported by the quality of the reporting. Despite findings from observational studies (OSs) represent a substantial proportion of media health news, limitations of OSs are often overlooked in medical journals' abstracts, in press releases, and in associated news stories. The objective of this analysis is to investigate how Italian online news media report on a contemporary OS published in a major medical journal and dealing with a topic of widespread interest. METHODS: The OS was published in Nature Medicine (Nat Med) in February 2022. It is a large retrospective cohort study aimed at characterizing the post-acute cardiovascular manifestations of covid-19. We collected Italian online news articles covering the Nat Med study that were released in the first two weeks after study publication. Based on resources focused on evaluation and proper reporting of OSs, we identified five thematic categories to be employed as a minimal reference standard to address the quality of reporting of the Nat Med study. Namely: 1) causality, 2) fear mongering, 3) spin, 4) actionability and 5) critical evaluation. Then, we defined a 13-item checklist aimed at exploring the existence of issues within each of the online news article with regard to the five thematic categories above. Outcome was the percentage of news articles covering the NM study showing issues with each of the five thematic categories. RESULTS: After checking for inclusion and exclusion criteria, we collected 30 news articles. Global inter-rater agreement related to the checklist completion by 4 raters was substantial. An issue with causality was identified in 30 articles out of 30 (100%). An issue with fear mongering was identified in 25 (83.3%) of the 30 articles, and an issue with spin in 21 (75%) of the 28 articles. Furthermore, an issue with actionability and critical evaluation was identified in 16 (53.3%) and 26 (86.7%) of the 30 articles, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis of Italian online news media reporting about a contemporary OS published in a major medical journal and dealing with a topic of high public interest has shown that most news articles fail to properly report on the study's findings.

[The updating of the hospital pharmacist. Orient yourself in a sea of information and knowledge.] / L'aggiornamento del farmacista ospedaliero. Orientarsi in un mare di informazioni e conoscenze.

The output of medical and scientific literature is on the rise and the health emergency caused by the covid-19 pandemic has led to a further growth in the number of articles published each year in International medical journals. Finding your way around this ocean of information is very difficult: the critical evaluation of scientific documentation requires time and specific skills, which are not easy to acquire. In addition to doctors and nurses, hospital and clinical pharmacists also struggle to keep up to date. Also for this reason, many institutions and various players in the publishing arena are developing tools that enable health personnel to access the best scientific knowledge, minimizing the risk inherent in the individually performed evaluation of evidence. In any case, it is essential to reconsider and update the methods of continuous education of the hospital pharmacist, also considering the changes that have taken place in his role, now integrated into the clinical teams together with the other professionals who guarantee health care.