Journals and Journalists

Here's an actual headline from today's news...

Women twice as likely to die from severe heart attack

If you look at the numbers, 10 percent of women in a large study were likely to die of a certain type of heart attack called STEMI (ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction). For the same type, 5 percent of the men died.

So "twice as likely" is true...but still a minority for either gender. The same headline would hold true if 2 percent of the women died, compared to 1 percent of the men.

So beware of risks worded as relative risks (i.e. twice as likely), even though they tend to sound more impressive. Find the absolute numbers (i.e. 10 percent vs 5 percent, 2 percent vs 1 percent) to get a clearer picture.

Here are some other headlines that weren't so inflammatory, but still got the point across.

Severe Heart Attacks Deadlier for Women

Deadliest Heart Attack Takes Toll on Women

Study: Gender gap remains for heart attack care

Another element of the study from which these data came, is the 12 percent higher risk of death women have with STEMIs, once factors such as age and other conditions were taken into account. So now, twice as likely, or a 100 percent more likely, is "downgraded" to 12 percent. I wanted more information.

My challenge today as a journalist, whose assignment was covering this "women and heart attacks" study in a matter of three hours, was getting hold of the actual journal article to review. I wanted to look at these statistics.

The web site of the journal did not have it clearly posted. There was no clearly posted phone number for media inquiries. The phone number for the American Heart Association, which publishes the journal Circulation in which the study appeared, was more for people seeking information about their "Go Red for Women" PR campaign, and not for substantive questions.

When I was transferred to the "journals department," the representative asked for my membership number. I explained that I was not a member, I was a journalist on deadline covering this study. I was put on hold so the rep could check with her supervisor. When she came back, she told me I would have to purchase the article. Their article. That was getting free media. And who knows when I would have gotten it! I was so frustrated, I ended the call.

In the end, I relied on the figures other articles in the media had quoted. And in my 1 minute 23 second package, I probably wouldn't have had time to explain all the intricacies anyway. It just would have given me more confidence that I had done my due diligence.

Obstructionist journals who clearly don't understand the needs of a journalist on deadline are just one of the variety of frustrations short-format, day-of television reporters have to deal with.