by Pat McNees (updated 5-30-2020) On the "Top of the Morning" page of the Center for Health Journalism, prominent health journalists and experts write what sites, newsletters, and social media feeds they turn to first every morning and why. Here below are links to those sites and others, in alphabetical Read More
Writers and Editors (Pat McNees's blog) RSS feed
Where journalists get their medical news and information
March 3, 2017
5 Comments
Comments
March 31, 2017 7:59 AM EDT
These sites are worth adding:
•
• Retraction Watch Ivan Oransky's excellent blog: Tracking retractions as a window into the scientific process. Sign up for his emails. It was from Retraction Watch that I learned about PubPeer.
• • PubPeer, the "online journal club," which allows users to critique published research--a form of post-publication peer review. PubPeer allows anonymous posting.
• • The Web's Faceless Judges (Jennifer Couzin-Frankel, Science, 8-9-13) "Many scientists long for a place for unfettered discussion about published papers, and PubPeer is one of the latest websites trying to fill that gap. These sites can help to clarify experiments, suggest avenues for follow-up work, and catch errors. But PubPeer's founders and most of its commenters choose to remain anonymous, which may foster free discussion but doesn't always elevate it."
•
• PubPeer’s secret is out: Founder of controversial website reveals himself (Jennifer Couzin-Frankel, Science, 8-31-15)
• • Nature editors: all hat and no cattle (PubPeer, 12-18-16). Nature offered similar "self-correction of science" and PubPeer argues "that Nature cannot and will not keep those promises, because of editorial and corporate conflicts of interest. At best the promises are wishful thinking and at worst cynical window-dressing."
- Pat McNees
February 24, 2018 7:26 AM EST
- Anonymous
August 21, 2018 8:51 AM EDT
"Many of the most popular news stories about health research include overstated findings or substantial inaccuracies, according to a study led by Noah Haber, a postdoctoral researcher at the Carolina Population Center at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill....Haber pointed to Health News Review and FiveThirtyEight and The Incidental Economist as online news sites that avoid many common pitfalls of reporting on health research. Health News Review even has criteria by which they evaluate news write-ups of academic research, which reporters might find useful."Covering health research? Choose your studies (and words) wisely (Chloe Reichel, Journalist's Resource, 8-20-18)• HealthNewsReview ("improving your critical thinking about health care")• The Incidental Economist• Five Thirty Eight
- PM
December 24, 2018 8:06 AM EST
A final HealthNewsReview.org report card from 3,200+ systematic reviews of health care news stories & PR releases (HealthNewsReview's final report card, 12-20-18) I was a little surprised at the higher-scoring publications list (based on scores on X number of reviews on HNR), with Vox at the top with 4.46 stars out of 5 (26 reviews--how many readers know about Vox?), followed by STAT (3.91)(44 reviews), Philadelphia Inquirer (3.69)(75 reviews), Associated Press (3.66)(336 reviews), Wall Street Journal (3.54). Check out the full list, on which the Washington Post is 10th, the weekly newsmagazines score lowish, and the New York Times doesn't appear at all. Why doesn't the Times appear, I wonder, and have asked.
- Pat McNees
April 06, 2019 11:59 AM EDT
Add to that list Uptodate: https://www.uptodate.com/homeOriginal clinical content authored by leading physicians synthesized into graded, evidence-based recommendations. For example:Acute treatment of migraine in adultshttps://www.uptodate.com/contents/acute-treatment-of-migraine-in-adults
- PM