A critical review exploring science communication of nutrition and dietetic research: a case‐based approach exploring methodologies

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundNutrition is an area of apparent disagreement among the public and experts. It is also an area which has seen a rapid increase in the number of publications in the past 40 years. With the advent of online media and social media platforms, the volume of news has also increased. This review considered five types of nutrition research and how press releases linked to publications might be reported by the media.MethodsExamples were taken from nutrition‐related articles published in the areas of in vitro work, animal data, epidemiology, clinical trials and data modelling publications which had press releases deposited in online repositories (EurekAlert! and AlphaGalileo). A critical narrative of the source of the media message, estimates of its reach and any potential exaggeration or source of confusion were identified.ResultsIt was clear that research has been reported by funders, journals and researchers' institutions in ways that claim extended findings of the data beyond that reported in the manuscript. This included inferences of health benefits in humans from laboratory studies, splitting outcome data for the same exposure in epidemiological studies based on perceived public interest, using clinical trials to make media claims that would not be permitted in advertisements and claiming modelled data for cases were actual changes in numbers of cases.ConclusionsIt is essential that funding bodies and institutions along with academic journals apply pressure to discourage exaggeration of research. This is necessary to maintain public trust in science and ultimately improve public health.