Smart drugs "as common as coffee": media hype about neuroenhancement.
Smart drugs "as common as coffee": media hype about neuroenhancement.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1371/journal.pone.0028416
复制
发表时间：
2011
期刊：
影响因子：
3.7
通讯作者：
Hall WD
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Partridge BJ;Bell SK;Lucke JC;Yeates S;Hall WD
使用处方药来改善正常人的认知功能--“神经增强”--最近得到了生物伦理学家和神经学家的关注。狂热者声称，这种做法很普遍，而且越来越多，而且有许多潜在的好处；然而，最近的证据对这些说法的支持力度很小。在这项研究中，我们探索了新闻纸媒体是如何描绘神经增强的。我们对媒体对神经强化的报道进行了一项实证研究，以探索：媒体对神经强化流行率的描述；媒体用来支持关于其流行率的说法的证据类型；以及这些媒体文章中提到的神经强化的可能好处和风险。利用FCTIVA数据库，我们找到了142篇关于2008-2010年期间用于神经增强的非医疗用处方药的报纸文章。我们进行了一项主题内容分析，内容包括文章如何描述神经强化的普及率；它们使用了什么类型的证据来支持；以及所提到的神经强化的潜在好处和风险/副作用。87%的媒体文章提到了神经强化的流行，94%的人将其描述为常见、增加或两者兼而有之。66%的人引用学术文献来支持这些说法，44%的人要么提到了作者，要么提到了期刊。95%的文章提到了使用处方药增强神经功能的至少一个可能的好处，但只有58%提到了任何风险/副作用。15%的人质疑处方药对使用者产生益处的有效性的证据。新闻媒体文章更多地提到了使用药物进行神经增强的可能好处，而不是潜在的风险/副作用，媒体声称神经增强很常见并且越来越普遍的主要来源是学术文献中的报道，这些报道对这一说法提供了薄弱的支持。我们敦促记者和研究人员在描述神经增强药物的非医疗用途时要谨慎。
The use of prescription drugs to improve cognitive functioning in normal persons –“neuroenhancement” – has gained recent attention from bioethicists and neuroscientists. Enthusiasts claim that the practice is widespread and increasing, and has many potential benefits; however recent evidence provides weak support for these claims. In this study we explored how the newsprint media portrays neuroenhancement. We conducted an empirical study of media reporting of neuroenhancement to explore: media portrayals of the prevalence of neuroenhancement; the types of evidence used by the media to support claims about its prevalence; and, the possible benefits and risks of neuroenhancement mentioned in these media articles. Using the Factiva database, we found 142 newspaper articles about the non-medical use prescription drugs for neuroenhancement for the period 2008-2010. We conducted a thematic content analysis of how articles portrayed the prevalence of neuroenhancement; what type of evidence they used in support; and, the potential benefits and risks/side-effects of neuroenhancement that were mentioned. 87% of media articles mentioned the prevalence of neuroenhancement, and 94% portrayed it as common, increasing or both. 66% referred to the academic literature to support these claims and 44% either named an author or a journal. 95% of articles mentioned at least one possible benefit of using prescription drugs for neuroenhancement, but only 58% mentioned any risks/side effects. 15% questioned the evidence for efficacy of prescription drugs to produce benefits to users. News media articles mentioned the possible benefits of using drugs for neuroenhancement more than the potential risks/side effects, and the main source for media claims that neuroenhancement is common and increasingly widespread has been reports from the academic literature that provide weak support for this claim. We urge journalists and researchers to be cautious in their portrayal of the non-medical use of drugs for neuroenhancement.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
1.4
作者：
Forlini, Cynthia;Racine, Eric
通讯作者：
Racine, Eric
影响因子：
4.1
作者：
Chatterjee, A
通讯作者：
Chatterjee, A
影响因子：
9.9
作者：
Larriviere, Dan;Williams, Michael A.;Bonnie, Richard J.
通讯作者：
Bonnie, Richard J.
影响因子：
3.7
作者：
Dasgupta N;Mandl KD;Brownstein JS
通讯作者：
Brownstein JS
影响因子：
4.1
作者：
Cakic, V.
通讯作者：
Cakic, V.