DOI 10.1097/wno.0000000000002454
Media Coverage of Nonarteritic Anterior Ischemic Optic Neuropathy (NAION) After Semaglutide Use: A Content Analysis of News Reporting Accuracy and Framing.
Аннотация
BACKGROUND
In July 2024, a matched cohort study reported an association between semaglutide, a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA), and nonarteritic anterior ischemic optic neuropathy (NAION), a rare optic neuropathy. The study prompted widespread media coverage. Given the media's role in shaping perceptions of drug safety, we conducted a content analysis of news reporting on this association.
METHODS
We performed a qualitative content analysis of English-language news articles published between July 3, 2024, and March 31, 2025. Articles were retrieved through LexisNexis and included if they discussed both GLP-1 RAs and NAION in a public-facing context. Articles were coded by 3 independent reviewers using a structured tool to assess scientific accuracy, causal language, framing of certainty, citation of the original study, quoted sources, and emotive or misleading language.
RESULTS
Seventy-one articles met inclusion criteria. Twenty-one percent used causal language, 80% used scientific language, and 48% contained misleading claims. Articles with causation errors were less likely to correctly define NAION (73% vs 92%), quote physicians (33% vs 63%), or mention study limitations (27% vs 66%). US articles had the lowest rate of causation errors (5%) and UK. articles had the highest (34%).
CONCLUSIONS
Media coverage of the potential semaglutide-NAION link varied in accuracy and tone. Articles avoiding causation errors more often included expert input and contextualized uncertainty. These findings highlight the need for responsible health journalism in reporting emerging safety concerns.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.