Study notes lack of specialized training
By Phil Galewitz
Health journalists could better inform the public if they realized how illiterate most Americans are when it comes to understanding medical concepts and issues, concludes a new study by two University of Missouri researchers.
The journalism researchers conducted a national survey – in partnership with the Association of Health Care Journalists – and found that most health journalists have not had specialized training in health reporting and face challenges in communicating medical science developments.
Assistant Professors Amanda Hinnant and Maria Len-Ríos surveyed 396 newspaper and magazine journalists and completed 35 in-depth interviews to gather insight into the role of journalists in reducing the negative effects of limited health literacy.
Almost half of the journalists reported they were not familiar with the concept of health literacy, but said that their readers' ability to understand health information was very important to consider when writing health stories," Hinnant said. "Increasing knowledge of health literacy could help journalists clarify medical information to readers."
Maria Len-Ríos |
Amanda Hinnant |
|
For more information about the study, contact Hinnant (hinnanta@missouri.edu) or Len-Ríos (lenriosm@missouri.edu). |
|
Health literacy is the ability to process and understand basic health information and services needed to make appropriate health decisions and follow instructions for treatment, according to the American Medical Association.
Of the journalists surveyed, only 18 percent had specialized training in health reporting. "Health journalists play an important role in helping people effectively manage their health," Len-Ríos said. "However, we found that many journalists find it difficult to explain health information to their readers, while maintaining the information's scientific credibility."
She noted journalists constantly wrestle with putting too much technical scientific details in a story versus 'dumbing it down' with overly simplistic recommendations.
Journalists reported quoting medical experts, avoiding technical terms, and providing data and statistics as the three most important elements to making health information understandable. However, understanding numbers is a challenge for many people, Hinnant said. Mathematics literacy is a serious problem in the United States. Only 39 percent of U.S. students are at or above the "proficient" level in eighth grade and only 23 percent are at that level by 12th grade. Mathematical knowledge is important to understand health information, Hinnant said.
"A large percentage of Americans are not health literate, which is related to significant health problems including medication errors, failing to seek treatment and an inability to understand directions about proper health behavior," Hinnant said. "The role of a health journalist includes translating medical information and acting as a liaison responsible for providing quality information. We need to actively find ways to improve health coverage and recognize the importance of the media's role in improving the public's quality of life."
Results from the study, "Tacit Understandings of Health Literacy: Interview and Survey Research with Health Journalists," were presented at the 2008 Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication convention in Chicago. The paper received the Top Faculty Paper Award from the Science Communication Interest Group. The research was funded by the Missouri Foundation for Health and the Missouri Health Literacy Enhancement Priority Area Grant.
A short Q&A with Hinnant:
Q: Were you surprised only 6.4 percent of journalists (4.8 percent newspaper journalists) reported that a majority of their readers change health behaviors based on the information they provide?
A: We were not surprised because this is supported by the information-seeking research that shows media serve an "alerting" function in telling people about the existence of a health problem or about good health behaviors. Often, people will search for more information or consult with interpersonal sources, such as doctors or friends and family, before making a behavior change.
Q: Based on your study, how prepared would you say most health journalists are "to serve as information brokers between readers and scientists"?
A: They are experienced information-gatherers, and they do important translation work. They have been facing the daunting challenge of informing people about medical news and good health decisions without knowing the specific research on health literacy. For health journalists to understand the range of literacy levels and the information needs of low-literate people would enhance their ability to communicate good health information to a greater majority of the populace.
Q: How important is it for health journalists to know the term "health literacy" versus having an understanding that they need to carefully define health terms for lay audiences? In other words, I think most journalists realize they have to explain various medical concepts to readers, but they may not be familiar with the term "health literacy."
A: Health journalists have sophisticated ideas about their readers' comprehension and about how to convey complicated medical information to readers. Knowing the term "health literacy" is less important for journalists to know than what is behind the term. Knowing readers' capacity to understand numbers, for example, is more crucial than knowing the term.
Q. Can you elaborate what you mean by this statement in the study: "Findings show that journalists struggle to maintain scientific credibility while accommodating different audience literacy levels?
A: The problem stems from serving two masters. The rituals of scientific verification make information too dense, data-heavy, and jargon-filled for people with lower literacy levels to understand. In the words of some journalists, a story can become "bogged down." The devices used to communicate a story to readers with lower literacy diminish the markers of scientific credibility. These devices include using narratives from real people, avoiding jargon, and giving direct behavioral advice. Several journalists, however, say that they are careful to avoid "dumbing down" a story to the point where it has no signs of scientific credibility and to where it may condescend to readers' intelligence. It would be incredibly useful to determine a way for a story to both convey scientific credibility and be understandable to a majority of readers.
Q: Your study implies journalists rely too heavily on statistics to explain health issues to readers – why is that?
A: We don't know why health journalists rely on statistics beyond the simple fact that many of them think statistics are comprehension aids.
Phil Galewitz is the health writer at The Palm Beach Post and editor of HealthBeat, AHCJ's quarterly newsletter.
