IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v56y2003i10p2211-2220.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Houseofficers' reactions to media coverage about the sequencing of the human genome

Author

Listed:
  • Geller, Gail
  • Tambor, Ellen S.
  • Bernhardt, Barbara A.
  • Rodgers, Joann
  • Holtzman, Neil A.

Abstract

After the announcement that sequencing of the human genome was nearly complete, media coverage was extensive. In light of ample evidence that the media are a primary source of health and science information, even for health professionals, media portrayals are often inaccurate or misleading, and discoveries that emanate from sequencing the human genome are likely to influence future health care, it is important to assess physicians' interpretations of media coverage about the human genome announcement. This paper describes the reactions of a sample of new physicians in the United States to this announcement, as well as the content of the stories they read or heard. Semi-structured surveys were distributed to all incoming houseofficers during Orientation at one major academic medical center. Eighty-one percent of 190 houseofficers returned a survey; 123 completed surveys were analyzed. Fifty-four percent of respondents thought the media message was only positive and 21% thought it was negative or mixed. Participants who reported radio as their media source were less likely to recall positive messages (p

Suggested Citation

  • Geller, Gail & Tambor, Ellen S. & Bernhardt, Barbara A. & Rodgers, Joann & Holtzman, Neil A., 2003. "Houseofficers' reactions to media coverage about the sequencing of the human genome," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 56(10), pages 2211-2220, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:56:y:2003:i:10:p:2211-2220
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277-9536(02)00237-X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    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:56:y:2003:i:10:p:2211-2220. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

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

    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.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.