Hope, hype, and cure: Ethics and four-letter words in pediatric cancer care

Cancer occupies a special place in the collective consciousness, influencing how hope is expressed. Patients, families, and clinical teams hope for the best possible medical outcome, yet may perceive a given outcome as more or less likely to occur. Hope, hype, and cure exist along a continuum. These four-letter words influence care delivery, including uptake of innovative therapies. Physicians shape patient/parental hope. What physicians say may be viewed as less important than how it is said. Subtle changes in how hope is understood may contribute to hype and perspectives on cure. Through listening to children/parents, physicians respect and reinforce patients'/families' hopes.

Dark loops: contagion effects, consistency and chemosocial matrices in psychedelic-assisted therapy trials

What happens when an emerging programme of medical research overlaps with a surging social movement? In this article we draw on the anthropological term 'chemosociality' to describe forms of sociality born of shared chemical exposure. Psychedelic administration in the context of recent clinical trials appears to have been particularly chemosocial in nature. We argue that one consequence is that psychedelic-assisted therapy (PAT) clinical research trials tend to breach key assumptions underlying the logic of causal inference used to establish efficacy. We propose the concept of dark loops to describe forms of sociality variously emerging from, and impacting participant experiences in, PAT trials. These dark loops are not recorded, let alone incorporated into the causal pathways in the interpretation of psychedelic trial data to date. We end with three positions which researchers might adopt in response to these issues: chemosocial minimisation where research is designed to attenuate or eliminate the effects of dark loops in trials; chemosocial description where dark loops (and their impacts) are openly and candidly documented and chemosocial valorisation where dark loops are hypothesised to contribute to trial outcomes and actively drawn upon for positive effect. Our goal is to fold in an appreciation of how the increasingly-discussed hype surrounding psychedelic research and therapeutics continues to shape the phenomena under study in complex ways, even as trials become larger and more rigorous in their design.

Impact of hype on clinicians' evaluation of trials - a pilot study

Objective

The purpose of this study was to determine the practicality of using a teleconferencing platform to assess the effect of hype on clinicians' evaluations of reports of clinical trials in spinal care.

Methods

Twelve chiropractic clinicians were interviewed via a videoconferencing application. Interviews were recorded and timed. Participant behaviour was monitored for compliance with the protocol. Differences between participants numerical ratings of hyped and non-hyped abstracts based on four measures of quality were analysed using pairwise comparisons (Wilcoxon signed rank test for independent samples). In addition, a linear mixed effects model was fitted with condition (i.e. hype vs. no hype) as a fixed effect and participant and abstract as random effects.

Results

The interviews and data analysis were conducted without significant technical difficulty. Participant compliance was high, and no harms were reported. There were no statistically significant differences in the quality rankings of hyped versus non-hyped abstracts.

Conclusion

The use of a videoconferencing platform to measure the effects of hype on clinicians' evaluations of abstracts of clinical trials is practical and an adequately powered study is justified. Lack of statistically significant results may well be due to low participant numbers.

What threatens stock markets more - The coronavirus or the hype around it?

We use a linear regularized model with structural changes and found that the coronavirus pandemic had a direct and an indirect effect (via media hype) on stock markets. We reveal a correlation between internet search queries, discussions of the pandemic in the press and social media, and changes in stock market indices. We demonstrated that the effect of the pandemic coverage in digital and printed media and the effect of Google queries was comparable to, and sometimes even exceeded, the effect of the pandemic itself. We showed the effect of hype on the volume of Google queries and social media publications.

Population health AI researchers' perceptions of the public portrayal of AI: A pilot study

This article reports how 18 UK and Canadian population health artificial intelligence researchers in Higher Education Institutions perceive the use of artificial intelligence systems in their research, and how this compares with their perceptions about the media portrayal of artificial intelligence systems. This is triangulated with a small scoping analysis of how UK and Canadian news articles portray artificial intelligence systems associated with health research and care. Interviewees had concerns about what they perceived as sensationalist reporting of artificial intelligence systems - a finding reflected in the media analysis. In line with Pickersgill's concept of 'epistemic modesty', they considered artificial intelligence systems better perceived as non-exceptionalist methodological tools that were uncertain and unexciting. Adopting 'epistemic modesty' was sometimes hindered by stakeholders to whom the research is disseminated, who may be less interested in hearing about the uncertainties of scientific practice, having implications on both research and policy.

Causal overstatements reduced in press releases following academic study of health news

Background: Exaggerations in health news were previously found to strongly associate with similar exaggerations in press releases. Moreover such exaggerations did not appear to attract more news. Here we assess whether press release practice changed after these reported findings; simply drawing attention to the issue may be insufficient for practical change, given the challenges of media environments. Methods: We assessed whether rates of causal over-statement in press releases based on correlational data were lower following a widely publicised paper on the topic, compared to an equivalent baseline period in the preceding year. Results: We found that over-statements in press releases were 28% (95% confidence interval = 16% to 45%) in 2014 and 13% (95% confidence interval = 6% to 25%) in 2015. A corresponding numerical reduction in exaggerations in news was not significant. The association between over-statements in news and press releases remained strong. Conclusions: Press release over-statements were less frequent following publication of Sumner et al. (2014). However, this is correlational evidence and the reduction may be due to other factors or natural fluctuations.

The association between exaggeration in health-related science news and academic press releases: a replication study

Background: Exaggerations in health news were previously found to strongly associate with similar exaggerations in press releases. Moreover, such press release exaggerations did not appear to attract more news.

Methods: Here we tested the replicability of these findings in a new cohort of news and press releases based on research in UK universities in 2014 and 2015. Press releases and news were compared to their associated peer-reviewed articles to define exaggeration in advice, causal claims and human inference from non-human studies.

Results: We found that the association between news and press releases did not replicate for advice exaggeration, while this association did replicate for causal claims and human inference from non-human studies. There was no evidence for higher news uptake for exaggerated press releases, consistent with previous results. Base exaggeration rates were lower for human inference from non-human studies, possibly reflecting the Concordat on Openness on Animal Research in the UK.

Conclusions: Overall, the picture remains that the strength of news statements is normally associated with the strength of press release statements, and without evidence that exaggerated statements get significantly more news.

The Promise and the Hype of 'Personalised Medicine'

Personalised medicine is widely considered as the way of the future for medicine. However, progress in cancer, with a few outstanding exceptions, has fallen below expectations because of the challenges of tumour heterogeneity and clonal evolution. In both benign and malignant disease, diseases caused by single genetic alterations are more amenable to precision medicine approaches. However, most common diseases are caused by a complex interplay of multiple genetic and environmental factors making personalised medicine far more challenging. The current optimism for personalised medicine is distorting clinical consultations, resource allocation and research funding prioritisation. A research active clinician must act both as an agent of change and development, and as a communicator of realism. Thus personalised medicine that includes a sober appreciation of what genomics can achieve, together with continued focus on the individual as a person not just as a genome, will contribute to further improvements in health and healthcare.

Personalised Medicine: The Promise, the Hype and the Pitfalls

In engaging critically with personalised medicine and mapping pitfalls which mark its progress this project aims to stimulate conversations which deal intelligently with controversies for the sake of consensus. We aim to ask the ethical questions which will lead to the improvement of healthcare and we take an open-minded approach to finding answers to them over time. What is or should be meant by 'personalised medicine' is a major theme of this issue. It is a debate bound up with question of both values in the sense of ethical reflection and value in the sense of economic return. This editorial discusses and interrelates the articles of the issue under four headings: the promise and the hype of personalised medicine; the human person and the communication of risk; data sharing and participation; value, equity and power. A key intention throughout is to provoke discourse and debate, to identify aspirations which are more grounded in myth or hype than reality and to challenge them; and to identify focussed, practical questions which need further examination.

UK science press officers, professional vision and the generation of expectations

Science press officers can play an integral role in helping promote expectations and hype about biomedical research. Using this as a starting point, this article draws on interviews with 10 UK-based science press officers, which explored how they view their role as science reporters and as generators of expectations. Using Goodwin's notion of 'professional vision', we argue that science press officers have a specific professional vision that shapes how they produce biomedical press releases, engage in promotion of biomedical research and make sense of hype. We discuss how these insights can contribute to the sociology of expectations, as well as inform responsible science communication.

Expectations and beliefs in science communication: Learning from three European gene therapy discussions of the early 1990s

There is widespread agreement that the potential of gene therapy was oversold in the early 1990s. This study, however, comparing written material from the British, Danish and German gene therapy discourses of the period finds significant differences: Over-optimism was not equally strong everywhere; gene therapy was not universally hyped. Against that background, attention is directed towards another area of variation in the material: different basic assumptions about science and scientists. Exploring such culturally rooted assumptions and beliefs and their possible significance to science communication practices, it is argued that deep beliefs may constitute drivers of hype that are particularly difficult to deal with. To participants in science communication, the discouragement of hype, viewed as a practical-ethical challenge, can be seen as a learning exercise that includes critical attention to internalised beliefs.

The role of expectations, hype and ethics in neuroimaging and neuromodulation futures

The production of expectations or future-goals for the development of techniques which “read” and modulate brain function, represent an important practical tool for neuroscientists. These visions-of-the-future assist scientists by providing focus for both individual and cross-disciplinary research programs; they encourage the development of new industrial sectors, are used to justify the allocation of government resources and funding, and via the media can help capture the imagination and support of the public. However, such expectations need to be tempered by reality. Over-hyping brain imaging and modulation will lead to disappointment; disappointment that in turn can undermine its potential. Similarly, if neuroscientists focus their attention narrowly on the science without concomitant consideration of its future ethical, legal and social implications, then their expectations may remain unrealized. To develop these arguments herein we introduce the theoretical concept of expectations and the practical consequences of expectations. We contextualize these reflections by referring to brain imaging and modulation studies on deception, which encompass the measurement-suppression-augmentation range.

Hype and public trust in science

Social scientists have begun elucidating the variables that influence public trust in science, yet little is known about hype in biotechnology and its effects on public trust. Many scholars claim that hyping biotechnology results in a loss of public trust, and possibly public enthusiasm or support for science, because public expectations of the biotechnological promises will be unmet. We argue for the need for empirical research that examines the relationships between hype, public trust, and public enthusiasm/support. We discuss the complexities in designing empirical studies that provide evidence for a causal link between hype, public trust, and public enthusiasm/support, but also illustrate how this may be remedied. Further empirical research on hype and public trust is needed in order to improve public communication of science and to design evidence-based education on the responsible conduct of research for scientists. We conclude that conceptual arguments made on hype and public trust must be nuanced to reflect our current understanding of this relationship.

Expectations of iPad use in an internal medicine residency program: is it worth the "hype"?

Background

While early reports highlight the benefits of tablet computing in hospitals, introducing any new technology can result in inflated expectations.

Objective

The aim of the study is to compare anticipated expectations of Apple iPad use and perceptions after deployment among residents.

Methods

115 internal medicine residents received Apple iPads in October 2010. Residents completed matched surveys on anticipated usage and perceptions after distribution 1 month prior and 4 months after deployment.

Results

In total, 99% (114/115) of residents responded. Prior to deployment, most residents believed that the iPad would improve patient care and efficiency on the wards; however, fewer residents “strongly agreed” after deployment (34% vs 15% for patient care, P<.001; 41% vs 24% for efficiency, P=.005). Residents with higher expectations were more likely to report using the iPad for placing orders post call and during admission (71% vs 44% post call, P=.01, and 16% vs 0% admission, P=.04). Previous Apple iOS product owners were also more likely to use the iPad in key areas. Overall, 84% of residents thought the iPad was a good investment for the residency program, and over half of residents (58%) reported that patients commented on the iPad in a positive way.

Conclusions

While the use of tablets such as the iPad by residents is generally well received, high initial expectations highlight the danger of implementing new technologies. Education on the realistic expectations of iPad benefits may be warranted.

Taking the patient's side: the ethics of pharmacogenetics

From the perspective of current and future patients, the development of the field of pharmacogenetics is of immense interest. The encouraging vision that is now being established is that we may move from trial and error therapies to evidence-based personalized medicine in clinical practice. However, research and the application of pharmacogenetics to clinical practice are believed to raise a host of controversial ethical issues. Some of these are related to the research process, for example, confidentiality and informed consent in association with human tissue sampling. Other issues arise on a societal level, for example, issues regarding justice and the use of race or ethnicity as proxies for genotyping. In this perspective, I comment on this debate and also suggest what we may learn from previous discussions regarding DNA testing and gene transfer methods. Arguably, the most important ethical perspective in medical research and drug development is related to the interests of patients wanting medical treatment that is both effective and carries low risks of adverse effects. Risk:benefit ratios must always be compared with existing alternatives, and while the risk of adverse effects may be tolerable for some individuals, owing to genetic reasons, this may not be relevant for others. This will have consequences for regulatory policies regarding drug development. In the future, personalized medicine will also need to take epigenetic and environmental factors into consideration.