Science journalists are uniquely positioned to increase the societal impact of open research outputs by contextualizing and communicating findings in ways that highlight their relevance and implications for non-specialist audiences. Yet, it is unclear to what degree journalists use open research outputs, such as open access publications or preprints, in their reporting; what factors motivate or constrain this use; and how the recent surge in openly available research seen during the COVID-19 pandemic has affected this. This article examines these questions through a review of relevant literature published from 2018 onwards-particularly literature relating to the COVID-19 pandemic-as well as seminal articles outside the search dates. We find that research that explicitly examines journalists\' engagement with open access publications or preprints is scarce, with existing literature mostly addressing the topic tangentially or as a secondary concern, rather than a primary focus. Still, the limited body of evidence points to several factors that may hamper journalists\' use of these outputs and thus warrant further exploration. These include an overreliance on traditional criteria for evaluating scientific quality; concerns about the trustworthiness of open research outputs; and challenges using and verifying the findings. We also find that, while the COVID-19 pandemic encouraged journalists to explore open research outputs such as preprints, the extent to which these explorations will become established journalistic practices remains unclear. Furthermore, we note that current research is overwhelmingly authored and focused on the Global North, and the United States specifically. We conclude with recommendations for future research that attend to issues of equity and diversity, and more explicitly examine the intersections of open access and science journalism.

Background: The use of advanced algorithmic techniques is increasingly changing the nature of work for highly trained professionals. In the media industry, one of the technical advancements that often comes under the spotlight is automated journalism, a solution generally understood as the auto generation of journalistic stories through software and algorithms, without any human input except for the initial programming. Methods: In order to conduct a systematic review of existing empirical research on automated journalism, I analysed a range of variables that can account for the semantical, chronological and geographical features of a selection of academic articles as well as their research methods, theoretical backgrounds and fields of inquiry. I then engaged with and critically assessed the meta-data that I obtained to provide researchers with a good understanding of the main debates dominating the field. Results: My findings suggest that the expression \"automated journalism\" should be called into question, that more attention should be devoted to non-English speaking scholarship, that the collective and individual impacts of the technology on media practitioners should be better documented and that well-established sociological theories such as institutionalism and Bourdieu\'s field theory could constitute two adequate frameworks to study automated journalism practices. Conclusions: This systematic literature therefore provides researchers with an overview of the main challenges and debates that are occurring within the field of automated journalism studies. Future studies should, in particular, make use of institutionalism and field theory to explore how automated journalism is impacting the work of media practitioners, which could help unearth common patterns across media organisations.

OBJECTIVE: This review aims to summarise the evidence on the impact of news media and social media reports of severe mental illness (SMI) on stigma, and interventions that aim to mitigate any adverse impact.
METHODS: A systematic search of electronic databases was conducted in December 2017 to identify studies that report on the impact of media coverage or media interventions on stigma related to schizophrenia, psychosis, bipolar disorder, or mental illness in general. Data were synthesised narratively.
RESULTS: 12 studies met inclusion criteria; seven explored the impact of news media on stigma towards SMI or general mental illness, two explored the impact of social media, while three evaluated interventions that aimed to mitigate this impact. These studies showed that positive news reports and social media posts are likely to lead to reductions in stigmatizing attitudes and negative reports and social media posts are likely to increase stigmatizing attitudes. There were a limited number of interventions aiming to mitigate the negative impact of news reports of mental illness on stigma; however, these were ineffective. Interventions with media professionals appear to be successful at reducing their stigmatizing attitudes, but can also act to increase both positive and negative reports in the media.
CONCLUSIONS: Given the limited research evidence on the impact of news and social media on stigma towards SMI, and on the effectiveness of interventions aiming to mitigate this impact, further studies of higher quality are needed in this area. Due to mixed findings, interventions with media professionals are also an area of research priority.

UNASSIGNED: Taking into account that a key determinant in public approval of vaccinations is how the media constructs and frames messages about vaccination programmes, our aim is to review communication studies exploring media coverage of vaccines within traditional media venues.
UNASSIGNED: Using a registered protocol (PROSPERO: 42017072849), a systematic review was conducted that searched in three international electronic databases (PubMed, Scopus, and the International Bibliography of Social Science) for articles published between 2007 and 2017 following content-analysis methods. The characteristics and outcomes were systematically identified and described. The search yielded 24 eligible studies that were further analysed in the review.
UNASSIGNED: Media coverage of vaccines has been largely studied during the last decade. Findings revealed that 62% ( n = 15) of studies analysed the human papillomavirus vaccine, 87% ( n = 21) examined newspapers, and 62% ( n = 15) examined North American media. In relation to media content analyses, 75% found negative messages on vaccines and 83% identified a lack of accurate information.
UNASSIGNED: This systematic review suggests an agenda for further research. There is a significant need to analyse other types of traditional media beyond newspapers. Future studies should focus on other geographical areas such as low-income countries and on analysing visual materials and digital media. We found that negative messages and inaccurate information are common in media coverage on vaccines; therefore, further research focusing on these topics is needed. Officials in public health organizations should develop a close collaboration with the media to improve public communication on vaccines.

暂无摘要。

暂无摘要。

The mass media may increase stigma against people with mental health problems by reinforcing common stereotypes. Media professionals thus represent a target group for antistigma interventions. This paper aims to review available literature on antistigma interventions for mass media professionals, seeking to clarify what kind of interventions have been found to be effective in reducing mental health stigma among mass media professionals.
Six electronic databases (MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Embase, Cochrane Reviews Library and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, and Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts) were systematically searched through March 2017 for studies addressing antistigma interventions on mass media professionals.  Results: A total of 27 studies on antistigma interventions targeted to media professionals were found. Reviewed articles were classified into 3 categories: media-monitoring projects/reporting guidelines ( n = 23), interventions for educating journalists ( n = 2), and interventions for educating journalism students ( n = 2). Overall, antistigma interventions for media professionals seem to have some effect in improving reporting style, thus providing a more balanced portrayal of people with mental health problems: the most promising interventions are contact-based educational approaches and the provision of guidelines by authoritative institutions.
It should be useful to promote and disseminate contact-based educational interventions targeted to journalists and to include specific modules on mental health topics in the training curricula of journalism students. However, as research in the field suffers from several limitations, high-quality studies exploring the long-term effect of antistigma interventions for media professionals are needed.

OBJECTIVE: Although some research and publication practices are clearly unethical, including fraud and plagiarism, other areas of research and publication, such as informed consent and conflicts of interest, fall into grayer areas.
CONCLUSIONS: The purposes of this article are, therefore, to review a variety of relevant ethical issues in radiology-related journalism, peer review, and research; to review the radiology literature to date that has addressed these issues; and to present position statements and potential solutions to these problems.

Journalists\' exposure to potentially traumatic events (PTEs), high levels of job stress, and anecdotal reports within the industry seem to suggest that journalists are at greater risk than the general population to experience substance use disorders. The present systematic literature review (SLR) aims to provide a concise, comprehensive, and systematic review of the quantitative literature relating to journalists\' experience of substance use.
The systematic review method adopted within the present study was based on that prescribed by Fink in the 2010 book, Conducting systematic literature reviews: From the internet to paper, 3rd ed., which contains three main elements: sampling the literature, screening the literature, and extracting data.
Alcohol consumption is the most widely studied substance in journalist samples and is discussed in relation to quantity, level of risk, and potential alcoholism. The review also considers journalists\' use of substances, including cigarettes, cannabis, and other illicit substances. In particular, comparisons are made between journalistic roles and gender.
The research is piecemeal in nature, in that more recent research does not build upon the research that has come before it. Much of what has been reported does not reflect the progress that has taken place in recent years within the alcohol consumption and substance use field in terms of theory, assessment, scale development, practice, and interventions with those who use or are addicted to various substances. This SLR raises a number of methodological and theoretical issues to be explored and addressed in future research.

While the quality of environmental science journalism has been the subject of much debate, a widely accepted benchmark to assess the quality of coverage of environmental topics is missing so far. Therefore, we have developed a set of defined criteria of environmental reporting. This instrument and its applicability are tested in a newly established monitoring project for the assessment of pieces on environmental issues, which refer to scientific sources and therefore can be regarded as a special field of science journalism. The quality is assessed in a kind of journalistic peer review. We describe the systematic development of criteria, which might also be a model procedure for other fields of science reporting. Furthermore, we present results from the monitoring of 50 environmental reports in German media. According to these preliminary data, the lack of context and the deficient elucidation of the evidence pose major problems in environmental reporting.