↓ Skip to main content

The media and access issues: content analysis of Canadian newspaper coverage of health policy decisions

Overview of attention for article published in Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (97th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
78 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages
f1000
1 research highlight platform

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
63 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The media and access issues: content analysis of Canadian newspaper coverage of health policy decisions
Published in
Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, August 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13023-015-0320-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christen Rachul, Timothy Caulfield

Abstract

Previous studies have demonstrated how the media has an influence on policy decisions and healthcare coverage. Studies of Canadian media have shown that news coverage often emphasizes and hypes certain aspects of high profile health debates. We hypothesized that in Canadian media coverage of access to healthcare issues about therapies and technologies including for rare diseases, the media would be largely sympathetic towards patients, thus adding to public debate that largely favors increased access to healthcare-even in the face of equivocal evidence regarding efficacy. In order to test this hypothesis, we conducted a content analysis of 530 news articles about access to health therapies and technologies from 15 major Canadian newspapers over a 10-year period. Articles were analyzed for the perspectives presented in the articles and the types of reasons or arguments presented either for or against the particular access issue portrayed in the news articles. We found that news media coverage was largely sympathetic towards increasing healthcare funding and ease of access to healthcare (77.4 %). Rare diseases and orphan drugs were the most common issues raised (22.6 %). Patients perspectives were often highlighted in articles (42.3 %). 96.8 % of articles discussed why access to healthcare needs to increase, and discussion that questioned increased access was only included in 33.6 % articles. We found that news media favors a patient access ethos, which may contribute to a difficult policy-making environment.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 78 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 63 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 16 25%
Student > Bachelor 9 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 13%
Researcher 5 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 5%
Other 7 11%
Unknown 15 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 13 21%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 11%
Psychology 5 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 5%
Other 10 16%
Unknown 16 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 52. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 January 2020.
All research outputs
#840,969
of 25,914,360 outputs
Outputs from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#74
of 3,210 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,916
of 280,393 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#1
of 45 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,914,360 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,210 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 280,393 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 45 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.