- oregonlive.com/health/index.ssf/2011/07/saving_brains_is_there_a_way_t.html
- oregonlive.com/health/index.ssf/2011/09/treating_heart_disease_through.html
- oregonlive.com/health/index.ssf/2011/10/for_failing_lungs_a_risky_trea.html
- oregonlive.com/health/index.ssf/2011/12/in_an_imaginary_world_oregon_b.html
List date(s) this work was published or aired.
July 20th, Sept. 29th, Oct. 19th and Dec. 13th, 2011
Provide a brief synopsis of the story or stories, including any significant findings.
I chose these as examples of enterprise reporting that helps people understand medical innovations, not just the science but also the inevitable downsides and tradeoffs they bring. I aim to rise above the misleading ‘breakthrough’ format, and explain how factors such as availability of funding, specialists, and hospital capacity influence medical practice more than objective research findings. I answer practical questions relevant to ordinary people and supply immediate usefulness: when will a treatment become available? How much will a technology cost? How does it compare to existing options?
Explain types of documents, data or Internet resources used. Were FOI or public records act requests required? How did this affect the work?
For each story, I combed the medical literature for the most up-to-date peer-reviewed science on the questions at issue.
Explain types of human sources used.
I made a point of interviewing ordinary people caught in the teeth of the dilemma at issue. I always talked with physicians and scientists in addition to those making claims of efficacy for a new technology. Both are necessary for a tempered and realistic view of where things stand.
Follow-up (if any). Have you run a correction or clarification on the report or has anyone come forward to challenge its accuracy? If so, please explain.
No.
Advice to other journalists planning a similar story or project.
None