Skip to main content
letter
. 2018 May 29;33(9):1438–1440. doi: 10.1007/s11606-018-4492-9

Table 1.

Characteristics of Articles That Mentioned Health Effects

Positive impression (benefits outweigh harms) (N = 72) Negative impression (harms outweigh benefits) (N = 46) Neutral impression (N = 27) Total p value
Article focus
 Health and public health 6 (19.4) 21 (67.7) 4 (12.9) 31 < .001
 Non-health* 66 (57.9) 25 (21.9) 23 (20.2) 114
 Total 72 (49.7) 46 (31.7) 27 (18.6) 145
Publication
 USA Today 11 (33.3) 16 (48.5) 6 (18.2) 33 < .001
 New York Times 13 (39.4) 11 (33.3) 9 (27.3) 33
 Los Angeles Times 21 (77.8) 2 (7.4) 4 (14.8)
 New York Post 9 (60.0) 4 (26.7) 2 (13.3) 15
 The Denver Post 5 (26.3) 9 (47.4) 5 (26.3)
 Daily News New York 13 (72.2) 4 (22.2) 1 (5.6) 18
Health effects listed in article
Described both benefits and harms 24 (54.5) 9 (20.5) 11 (25.0) 44 < .001
Described benefits only 42 (93.3) 0 (0) 3 (6.7) 45
Described harms only 5 (9.3) 37 (68.5) 12 (22.2) 54
Year of publication
 2012 1 (11.1) 6 (66.7) 2 (22.2) 9 0.10
 2013 8 (36.4) 8 (36.4) 6 (27.3) 22
 2014 28 (48.3) 21 (36.2) 9 (15.5) 58
 2015 22 (61.1) 7 (19.4) 7 (19.4) 36
 2016 13 (65.0) 4 (20.0) 3 (15.0) 20

*Articles related to business, public policy, celebrity/entertainment/other, crime

Only the past 6 months were available on LexisNexis

Two articles while focused on health did not mention explicit benefits or harms and were therefore not included in this analysis