HOW DOES A CLINICAL TRIAL “FAIL?”
This is just one of the questions raised by what one might call “failed” reporting of a recent clinical trial of a microbicide.
The trial was conducted to discover if a microbide gel being tested could help prevent transmission of HIV. The product was found not to be effective in preventing transmission of HIV — an important finding, that, while not good news for all of us looking for immediate solutions to the HIV epidemic, answers the question to which the trial was seeking an answer.
But media stories have repeatedly referred to the “failed” trial, without exploring the purpose, methods, and conclusions of the trial.
Worse, some reports have referred to the trial’s “disastrous results” and to the participants as “victims” — a slur on the women who participated in the trial, as well as on the researchers — without supporting these implications. This is unfortunate, because clarifying, informing, explaining — questioning, and getting answers to questions, in short — make up our mission as journalists.
Becoming well-informed is part of that. Using words correctly and precisely is part of that. It is especially important when reporting science, if we are to retain our credibility as watchdogs of the public interest.
Health Desk is developing a page to provide definitions, sources and resources for journalists interested in reporting on research and is seeking sources, suggestions, requests and questions.
On the positive side the Times of Zambia last week had an enlightening interview with a trial participant. Other good work has been done by Post and Times reporters who spoke to a University of Zambia Ethics Committee spokesman who clarified the results of the trial.
A growing network, a continuing dialogue . . .
The miscommunications that mark much of the reporting of the recent local microbicide trial highlights the need for improved access between reporters to researchers.
An effort to address that is underway with the work of veteran journalist and media consultant Oliver Kanene with a grant from Wellcome Trust.
A three-day workshop in November, previously described here, was the beginning. In January the dialogue that began then continued with a breakfast meeting at the Intercontinental Hotel.
Dr. Lawrence Marum, Zambia director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention spoke about the benefits that have come, not just from research, but from its correct interpretation. Participants — reporters and researchers, as well as community artists — discussed some of the difficulties of bringing research to the public and raised some of the issues that arose during coverage of the Mazabuka microbicide trial.
More activities will be announced on Health Desk.
CONGRATULATIONS TO:
All of those recognized in the Malaria Media Awards:
THE ZAMBIA DAILY MAIL was recognized for its five-day series on Malaria
First place print: BIVAN SALUSEKI, POST NEWSPAPERS LIMITED for his creative article: “Fighting Malaria with Mosquito Nets”.
Second place print: CHARLES CHISALA, ZAMBIA DAILY MAIL for his article: “Right Forces, Ammo Deployed Against Malaria”.
First place broadcast: BIBIAN MWALE, RADIO CHRISTIAN VOICE for her malaria feature that looked at public awareness and rapid testing for the disease.
Second place broadcast: EMMANUEL MULENGA, a familiar face at these awards. His programme on prevention of malaria in pregnancy and in children aired on JOY FM.
Zambia Daily Mail Sports Editor Diana Zulu, who died in December, was recognized for her efforts to advance health reporting, and for her participation in the Zambia Daily Mail’s Malaria series.
FRONT LINE REPORTING
