Abstract
Biomedical findings mature from uncertain observations to validated facts. Although subsequent studies often refute initial appealing findings, newspapers privilege the latter and often fail to cover refutations. Thus, biomedical knowledge and media reporting may diverge with time. Here we investigated how French television reported on three scientific questions relative to attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) from 1995 to 2010: i) is ADHD mainly genetic in origin, ii) does methylphenidate treatment decrease the risk of academic underachievement, and iii) are brain imaging techniques able to reveal ADHD in individual patients? Although scientific evidence regarding these questions has evolved during these 16 years, we observed that nine out of ten TV programs broadcast between 2007 and 2010 still expressed only opinions against the current scientific consensuses. The failure of TV programs to reflect the evolution of the scientific knowledge might be related to a biased selection of medical experts.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
