The Journal: Mayo Clinic Proceedings

The Study: A team of Mayo Clinic physicians and professors of journalism from Arizona State University analyzed 1,203 newspaper articles written on various aspects of neurologic conditions. The stories were taken from the New York Times as well as eight regional newspapers with circulations of more than 200,000. The aim of the researchers was to spot any use of stigmatizing language. While scrutinizing the articles, the researchers also fact-checked the stories for medical errors.

What they found was that 21% of the stories contained language they deemed stigmatizing. Examples include sentences like this one:

>>The victims of stokes can be terrible puzzles, a torture to families, and sometimes an ordeal for the courts.<<

Or this: 

>>"No one would take a meeting with me or anything. I was damaged, goods, babe. That's what was in the back of my mind, damaged goods. Can't fit the American-male leading hero. A hero does not have a brain tumor." <<

In 55% of the cases, the source of the offending phrase was the reporter. But in 43% of the cases, the stigma had been introduced through a comment from patients or family members. Even physicians contributed stigmatizing language in 16% of instances.

The ASU researchers also found that 20% of the articles had medical errors or exaggerations such as overstating the effectiveness of a treatment. Another finding was that neurological conditions with the highest prevalence in the population such as migraines and head trauma were among the least covered subjects, accounting for just 3% and 2%, respectively, of all stories. Celebrities afflicted with a neurological condition were featured in 12% of all stories.

What it Means: While nearly 80% of the articles passed muster, the researchers did point out that stigmatizing language or errors can reinforce a negative self image or inflate hopes. "Health coverage has a big impact on how people view things," says Dr. Joseph Sirven, a neurologist from Mayo Clinic in Scottsdale, Arizona. "Sometimes if there's a negative perception, a patient might give up before they start." The remedy, says Sirven, is care. "We ask that, as reporters are writing, they stop and think about the choice of their words. Not to censor or edit, but to be mindful that sometimes you're creating or adding to the burden of disease."

Since journalists are apt to remain quite fallible folks, however, patients, families and even their physicians should also be careful as well. Both in choosing their words and reading the words of others.