Abstract
Little is known about the accuracy of societal publications (e.g. press releases, internet postings or professional journals) that are based on scientific work. This study investigates a) inconsistencies between scientific peer-reviewed health services research (HSR) publications and non-scientific societal publications and b) replication of reporting inadequacies from these scientific publications to corresponding societal publications. A sample of HSR publications was drawn from 116 publications authored in 2016 by thirteen Dutch HSR institutions. Societal publications corresponding to scientific publications were identified through a systematic internet search. We conducted a qualitative, directed content analysis on societal publications derived from the scientific publications to assess both reporting inadequacies and determine inconsistencies. Descriptive frequencies were calculated for all variables. Odds ratios were used to investigate whether inconsistencies in societal publications were less likely when the first scientific author was involved. We identified 43 scientific and 156 societal publications. 94 societal publications (60.3%), (associated with 32 scientific publications (74.4%)) contained messages that were inconsistent with the scientific work. We found reporting inadequacies in 22 scientific publications (51.2%). In 45 societal publications (28.9%), we found replications of these reporting inadequacies. The likelihood of inconsistencies between scientific and societal publications did not differ when the latter explicitly involved the first scientific author, (OR = 1.44, CI: 0.76-2.74); were published on the institute's or funder's website, (OR = 1.32, CI: 0.57-3.06); published with no involvement of a scientific author, (OR = 0.52, CI: 0.25-1.07). To improve societal publications, one should examine both the consistency with scientific research publications and ways to prevent replication of scientific reporting inadequacies. HSR institutions, funders, and scientific and societal publication platforms should invest in a supportive publication culture to further incentivise the responsible and skilled involvement of researchers in writing both scientific and societal publications.
Highlights
Little is known about the accuracy of societal publications that are based on scientific work
This study investigates a) inconsistencies between scientific peer-reviewed health services research (HSR) publications and non-scientific societal publications and b) replication of reporting inadequacies from these scientific publications to corresponding societal publications
We identified 43 scientific and 156 societal publications. 94 societal publications (60.3%), (associated with 32 scientific publications (74.4%)) contained messages that were inconsistent with the scientific work
Summary
Little is known about the accuracy of societal publications (e.g. press releases, internet postings or professional journals) that are based on scientific work. Most people take note of research findings through non-scientific, societal publications such as press releases, newspapers, social media, internet postings or professional journals [2,3,4]. The authors of societal publications simplify scientific messages and conclusions for their lay target group [8]. This can be done in a responsible manner, it does present a risk for misrepresentation and misinterpretation of the research findings [9]. Previous studies on biomedical publications concluded that unjustified causal claims are introduced in 20% to 33% of press releases, and that 40% of news articles give more explicit health advice to the readers than was expressed in the underlying scientific publication [10,11,12,13,14]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
