Are Research Papers Reporting Results from Nutrigenetics Clinical Research a Potential Source of Biohype?

被引：10

作者：

Stenne, R. ^{[1
]}

Hurlimann, T. ^{[1
]}

Godard, Beatrice ^{[1
]}

机构：

[1] Univ Montreal, Bioeth Programs, Dept Social & Prevent Med, Fac Med, Montreal, PQ H3C 3J7, Canada

来源：

ACCOUNTABILITY IN RESEARCH-POLICIES AND QUALITY ASSURANCE | 2012年 / 19卷 / 05期

基金：

加拿大健康研究院;

关键词：

nutrigenetics; clinical research; claims; biohype; DIETARY-INTAKE; NUTRIGENOMICS; MEDIA; SCIENCE; HYPE; BIOTECHNOLOGY; POLYMORPHISMS; COMMUNICATION; SCIENTISTS; CONSUMERS;

D O I：

10.1080/08989621.2012.718681

中图分类号：

R-052 [医学伦理学];

学科分类号：

0101 ; 120402 ;

摘要：

Nutrigenetics is a promising field, but the achievability of expected benefits is challenged by the methodological limitations that are associated with clinical research in that field. The mere existence of these limitations suggests that promises about potential outcomes may be premature. Thus, benefits claimed in scientific journal articles in which these limitations are not acknowledged might stimulate biohype. This article aims to examine whether nutrigenetics clinical research articles are a potential source of biohype. Of the 173 articles identified, 16 contained claims in which clinical applications were extrapolated from study results. The methodological limitations being incompletely acknowledged, these articles could potentially be a source of biohype.

引用

页码：285 / 307

页数：23

共 65 条

[1]

Aronson Naomi., 1984, STUDIES SOCIOLOGY SO, P1

[2] Facts limiting the theory of heredity [J].