Research Hype and Press Releases
How press releases and news stories exaggerate health research, what studies found about spin, and simple questions to ask before believing a headline about new science.
Content last updated . This page has not been medically reviewed.
Where headlines come from
Many health stories begin with a press release written by a university, journal or company. The release is meant to attract attention. Two studies measured how often those releases and the news that follows overstate the science. The results are a reason to check the original paper, not a reason to distrust all science news.What the research found
| Study | What was examined | Main finding |
|---|---|---|
| BMJ, 2014 | 462 press releases from 20 leading UK universities (2011) and 668 related news stories | 40% contained exaggerated advice, 33% exaggerated causal claims, 36% exaggerated inference to humans from animal research [1] |
| PLoS Medicine, 2012 | 70 press releases about two-arm randomized trials, with related news | "Spin" in 47% of press releases; results overestimated in 27% of reports based on the releases [2] |
Releases drive news. When a press release contained exaggerated advice, causal claims or animal-to-human inference, 58%, 81% and 86% of news stories did too. When the release was not exaggerated, the rates were 17%, 18% and 10%. [1] In the second study, spin in a release was most strongly linked to spin in the original article's abstract conclusion. [2] Among news items on trials, 51% carried spin. [2]
Exaggeration did not clearly win readers. The BMJ study found little evidence that exaggerated press releases increased uptake of the news. [1]
These samples are from UK universities and from trial press releases in a short window, so they show a pattern, not the exact rate today or for every source.
Three common stretches
- Association turned into cause. "Linked to" becomes "causes" or "prevents." See observational studies and confounding.
- Animals or cells turned into people. A mouse or lab-dish result becomes advice for readers. [1] See cell studies vs animal studies vs human trials.
- Spin on a trial. Reporting strategies that emphasize the benefit of the experimental treatment, even when the main result was not clearly positive. [2]
Questions to ask
- Who was studied: cells, animals or people, and how many?
- What was measured: how people feel or live, or only a marker? (surrogate vs patient-important outcomes)
- Compared with what: a placebo or other treatment, or nothing?
- Does the headline give advice the paper itself does not?
- Who paid for the work and who wrote the release? (funding and conflicts of interest)
- Has it been repeated or reviewed alongside other studies?
For product advertising specifically, see how to read health product marketing claims.
Frequently asked questions
Is a press release the same as peer-reviewed research?
No. A press release is a promotional summary. The studies above compared releases with the peer-reviewed papers they described and found that they sometimes went beyond them. [1]
Are exaggerated news stories mostly the journalists' fault?
In the BMJ sample, news exaggeration was strongly linked to exaggeration already present in the press release. [1]
What is "spin"?
Specific reporting strategies, intentional or unintentional, that emphasize the beneficial effect of the experimental treatment. [2]
How can I tell if a claim is overstated?
Compare it with the paper's own conclusion, and look for the six questions above. If you cannot find the original study, treat the claim as unverified.