Abstract：
Nutrition is an area of apparent disagreement among the public and experts. It is also an area which has seen a rapid increase in the number of publications in the past 40 years. With the advent of online media and social media platforms, the volume of news has also increased. This review considered five types of nutrition research and how press releases linked to publications might be reported by the media.
Examples were taken from nutrition-related articles published in the areas of in vitro work, animal data, epidemiology, clinical trials and data modelling publications which had press releases deposited in online repositories (EurekAlert! and AlphaGalileo). A critical narrative of the source of the media message, estimates of its reach and any potential exaggeration or source of confusion were identified.
It was clear that research has been reported by funders, journals and researchers\' institutions in ways that claim extended findings of the data beyond that reported in the manuscript. This included inferences of health benefits in humans from laboratory studies, splitting outcome data for the same exposure in epidemiological studies based on perceived public interest, using clinical trials to make media claims that would not be permitted in advertisements and claiming modelled data for cases were actual changes in numbers of cases.
It is essential that funding bodies and institutions along with academic journals apply pressure to discourage exaggeration of research. This is necessary to maintain public trust in science and ultimately improve public health.
Examples were taken from nutrition-related articles published in the areas of in vitro work, animal data, epidemiology, clinical trials and data modelling publications which had press releases deposited in online repositories (EurekAlert! and AlphaGalileo). A critical narrative of the source of the media message, estimates of its reach and any potential exaggeration or source of confusion were identified.
It was clear that research has been reported by funders, journals and researchers\' institutions in ways that claim extended findings of the data beyond that reported in the manuscript. This included inferences of health benefits in humans from laboratory studies, splitting outcome data for the same exposure in epidemiological studies based on perceived public interest, using clinical trials to make media claims that would not be permitted in advertisements and claiming modelled data for cases were actual changes in numbers of cases.
It is essential that funding bodies and institutions along with academic journals apply pressure to discourage exaggeration of research. This is necessary to maintain public trust in science and ultimately improve public health.
摘要：
背景：营养是公众和专家之间明显分歧的领域。这也是一个在过去40年中出版物数量迅速增加的领域。随着网络媒体和社交媒体平台的出现，新闻量也有所增加。这篇综述考虑了五种类型的营养研究，以及媒体如何报道与出版物相关的新闻稿。
方法：实例来自体外研究领域发表的营养相关文章，动物数据,流行病学,临床试验和数据建模出版物，其新闻稿存放在在线存储库中（EurekAlert！和AlphaGalileo）。对媒体信息来源的批判性叙述，确定了对其影响范围的估计以及任何潜在的夸大或混乱的来源。
结果：很明显，资助者已经报道了研究，期刊和研究机构声称，这些数据的发现超出了手稿中报道的范围。这包括从实验室研究中推断人类的健康益处，基于感知的公共利益，在流行病学研究中拆分相同暴露的结果数据，使用临床试验在广告中提出不允许的媒体声明，并声称病例的模型数据是病例数量的实际变化。
结论：资助机构和学术期刊必须施加压力，以阻止夸大研究。这对于保持公众对科学的信任并最终改善公共卫生是必要的。
方法：实例来自体外研究领域发表的营养相关文章，动物数据,流行病学,临床试验和数据建模出版物，其新闻稿存放在在线存储库中（EurekAlert！和AlphaGalileo）。对媒体信息来源的批判性叙述，确定了对其影响范围的估计以及任何潜在的夸大或混乱的来源。
结果：很明显，资助者已经报道了研究，期刊和研究机构声称，这些数据的发现超出了手稿中报道的范围。这包括从实验室研究中推断人类的健康益处，基于感知的公共利益，在流行病学研究中拆分相同暴露的结果数据，使用临床试验在广告中提出不允许的媒体声明，并声称病例的模型数据是病例数量的实际变化。
结论：资助机构和学术期刊必须施加压力，以阻止夸大研究。这对于保持公众对科学的信任并最终改善公共卫生是必要的。
