IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v365y2025ics0277953624010086.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

‘Small benefits and a certain risk’: Media representations of novel treatments for Alzheimer's disease

Author

Listed:
  • Abeysinghe, Sudeepa
  • Tao, Yu
  • Kyei-Baffour, Priscilla
  • Adrion, Emily

Abstract

The media is a key site for developing and communicating public understanding of Alzheimer's disease. Alzheimer's disease is a leading cause of dementia, and a condition that is prominent in public perceptions of ageing and cognitive decline. Novel disease-modifying treatments (DMTs) are the first innovation in Alzheimer's disease treatment for two decades, and have the potential to change how society thinks about Alzheimer's disease. This study investigates representation of risks and uncertainties of DMTs in articles published within the five highest circulation US newspapers between November 2020 and May 2024. This was a period of focused media attention on DMTs in the US, including reporting on Food and Drug Administration (FDA) review and approval processes and debates over public funding of these treatments through the Medicare program. The analysis finds that the media associated risks with the relative efficacy of the medications in comparison to the costs of these treatments. We further find that media representations highlight institutional challenges for the FDA in managing these uncertainties, within a situation characterized by expert contestation of the evidentiary basis for DMTs and patient hope for the promise that DMTs hold.

Suggested Citation

  • Abeysinghe, Sudeepa & Tao, Yu & Kyei-Baffour, Priscilla & Adrion, Emily, 2025. "‘Small benefits and a certain risk’: Media representations of novel treatments for Alzheimer's disease," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 365(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:365:y:2025:i:c:s0277953624010086
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2024.117554
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953624010086
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socscimed.2024.117554?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kate Holland & R. Warwick Blood & Michelle Imison & Simon Chapman & Andrea Fogarty, 2012. "Risk, expert uncertainty, and Australian news media: public and private faces of expert opinion during the 2009 swine flu pandemic," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(6), pages 657-671, June.
    2. Gary Schwitzer, 2008. "How Do US Journalists Cover Treatments, Tests, Products, and Procedures? An Evaluation of 500 Stories," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 5(5), pages 1-5, May.
    3. Amélie Yavchitz & Isabelle Boutron & Aida Bafeta & Ibrahim Marroun & Pierre Charles & Jean Mantz & Philippe Ravaud, 2012. "Misrepresentation of Randomized Controlled Trials in Press Releases and News Coverage: A Cohort Study," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(9), pages 1-11, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Joseph W Taylor & Marie Long & Elizabeth Ashley & Alex Denning & Beatrice Gout & Kayleigh Hansen & Thomas Huws & Leifa Jennings & Sinead Quinn & Patrick Sarkies & Alex Wojtowicz & Philip M Newton, 2015. "When Medical News Comes from Press Releases—A Case Study of Pancreatic Cancer and Processed Meat," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(6), pages 1-13, June.
    2. Gabe, Jonathan & Chamberlain, Kerry & Norris, Pauline & Dew, Kevin & Madden, Helen & Hodgetts, Darrin, 2012. "The debate about the funding of Herceptin: A case study of ‘countervailing powers’," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 75(12), pages 2353-2361.
    3. Cohen, Scott & Stienmetz, Jason & Hanna, Paul & Humbracht, Michael & Hopkins, Debbie, 2020. "Shadowcasting tourism knowledge through media: Self-driving sex cars?," Annals of Tourism Research, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    4. Benedikt Fecher & Freia Kuper & Birte Fähnrich & Hannah Schmid-Petri & Thomas Schildhauer & Peter Weingart & Holger Wormer, 2023. "Balancing interests between freedom and censorship: Organizational strategies for quality assurance in science communication," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 50(1), pages 1-14.
    5. Amanda Wilson & Billie Bonevski & Alison Jones & David Henry, 2009. "Media Reporting of Health Interventions: Signs of Improvement, but Major Problems Persist," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 4(3), pages 1-5, March.
    6. Xin Ming & Menno D. T. De Jong, 2021. "Mental Well-Being of Chinese Immigrants in the Netherlands during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Survey Investigating Personal and Societal Antecedents," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-20, April.
    7. Michael T M Wang & Mark J Bolland & Greg Gamble & Andrew Grey, 2015. "Media Coverage, Journal Press Releases and Editorials Associated with Randomized and Observational Studies in High-Impact Medical Journals: A Cohort Study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(12), pages 1-6, December.
    8. Michelle Nelson & Jiwoo Park, 2015. "Publicity as Covert Marketing? The Role of Persuasion Knowledge and Ethical Perceptions on Beliefs and Credibility in a Video News Release Story," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 130(2), pages 327-341, August.
    9. , Aisdl, 2020. "Let’s Do Better: Public Representations of COVID-19 Science," OSF Preprints 3cpvs, Center for Open Science.
    10. Robert G. Alexander & Stephen L. Macknik & Susana Martinez-Conde, 2022. "What the Neuroscience and Psychology of Magic Reveal about Misinformation," Publications, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-19, September.
    11. Estelle Dumas-Mallet & Andy Smith & Thomas Boraud & François Gonon, 2017. "Poor replication validity of biomedical association studies reported by newspapers," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(2), pages 1-15, February.
    12. Celia Andreu-Sánchez & Miguel Ángel Martín-Pascual, 2022. "Scientific illustrations of SARS-CoV-2 in the media: An imagedemic on screens," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-6, December.
    13. Markus Lehmkuhl & Nikolai Promies, 2020. "Frequency distribution of journalistic attention for scientific studies and scientific sources: An input–output analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(11), pages 1-20, November.
    14. Paula Silva & María P. Portillo & Alfredo Fernández-Quintela, 2022. "Resveratrol and Wine: An Overview of Thirty Years in the Digital News," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(23), pages 1-14, November.
    15. Maike Winters & Anna Larsson & Jan Kowalski & Carl Johan Sundberg, 2019. "The association between quality measures of medical university press releases and their corresponding news stories—Important information missing," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(6), pages 1-14, June.
    16. Austin Y. Hubner & Shelly R. Hovick, 2020. "Understanding Risk Information Seeking and Processing during an Infectious Disease Outbreak: The Case of Zika Virus," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(6), pages 1212-1225, June.
    17. Davis, Mark & Lyall, Benjamin & Whittaker, Andrea & Lindgren, Mia & Djerf-Pierre, Monika & Flowers, Paul, 2020. "A year in the public life of superbugs: News media on antimicrobial resistance and implications for health communications," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 256(C).
    18. Romana Haneef & Clement Lazarus & Philippe Ravaud & Amélie Yavchitz & Isabelle Boutron, 2015. "Interpretation of Results of Studies Evaluating an Intervention Highlighted in Google Health News: A Cross-Sectional Study of News," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(10), pages 1-15, October.
    19. Degeling, Chris & Kerridge, Ian, 2013. "Hendra in the news: Public policy meets public morality in times of zoonotic uncertainty," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 156-163.
    20. repec:plo:pone00:0196833 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Joaquin Chapa & Zeeshan Haq & Adam S. Cifu, 2017. "Comparative analysis of the factors associated with citation and media coverage of clinical research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 112(3), pages 1271-1283, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:365:y:2025:i:c:s0277953624010086. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.