Media coverage of chronic diseases in the Netherlands

Citation
Em. Van Der Wardt et al., Media coverage of chronic diseases in the Netherlands, SEM ARTH RH, 28(5), 1999, pp. 333-341
Citations number
26
Categorie Soggetti
Rheumatology
Journal title
SEMINARS IN ARTHRITIS AND RHEUMATISM
ISSN journal
00490172 → ACNP
Volume
28
Issue
5
Year of publication
1999
Pages
333 - 341
Database
ISI
SICI code
0049-0172(199904)28:5<333:MCOCDI>2.0.ZU;2-B
Abstract
Objective: Little is known about the quantity or quality of information on rheumatic diseases provided by the mass media. The aim of this study was to gain insight into the media coverage of rheumatic diseases compared with o ther chronic diseases in the Netherlands. Materials and Methods: Newspaper articles, magazine articles, and medical t elevision programs that appeared or were broadcast during a 1-year period, end contained information on rheumatic diseases, heart disease, cancer, chr onic lung disease, or diabetes mellitus, were selected for content analysis . For each article and program, it was determined whether coverage concentr ated on treatment, influence of lifestyle, scientific progress, or disease consequences. It was also determined whether professional experts and patie nts were featured. Results: Nine hundred seventeen newspaper articles, 304 magazine articles, and 163 medical programs were found. Most dealt with cancer (43%) and heart disease (37%). The amount of media attention given to each of the five dis ease categories was found to correspond with mortality but not with prevale nce. The contents of the articles and programs differed significantly accor ding to disease topic. The main focus in rheumatic diseases was on patients ' experiences, as well as regular and alternative medications. In heart dis ease and cancer, the main focus was on professional medical viewpoints, ope rations, and mortality, whereas in chronic lung disease and diabetes it was on treatments in the context of regular medications, scientific progress, and incurability. The influence of lifestyle on the disease process was men tioned most often in connection with diabetes, rheumatic disease, and chron ic lung disease. Conclusions: The amount of attention a disease category received from the m edia depended on its fatality rates and not on its prevalence. Heart diseas e and cancer were portrayed as being more serious than the more lingering d iseases. Surprisingly, the proportion of articles and programs that include d the influence of lifestyle in their coverage was lowest for cancer and he art disease. More frequent and more accurate coverage of chronic diseases, especially rheumatic diseases, is needed if their image is to be brought in to line with their importance for and impact on the community. Semin Arthri tis Rheum 28:333-341. Copyright (C) 1999 by W.B. Saunders Company.