Shaukat Ali Jawaid
In Pakistan, we are passionate about our rights and actively demand them, yet many are reluctant to embrace their responsibilities. Access to information is a fundamental right, but does this right extend to defaming, humiliating, or making baseless allegations against others? What about the spread of fake news and malicious propaganda, sometimes even at the cost of national interest? How should such challenges be addressed?
It is crucial that all media professionals, particularly those in electronic media, equip themselves with knowledge relevant to their field and adhere to professional ethics. Their credibility and reputation would greatly benefit from verifying the accuracy and quality of information before disseminating it. Unfortunately, the reality is quite different. Take the health sector, for example: many journalists covering health lack specialized training, leading to frequent misinterpretations and inaccuracies. A lack of familiarity with medical terminology often results in incorrect translations, distorting the intended message. Media organizations, both print and electronic, have a responsibility to provide adequate training opportunities for their staff, which would, in turn, enhance their credibility and public trust.
To illustrate this issue, let me share two recent examples where the misinterpretation of studies published in the Pakistan Journal of Medical Sciences, which I edit, resulted in misleading narratives that unfairly tarnished the medical profession.
In 2016, we published a study by Prof. Attia Bari and colleagues from Children’s Hospital Lahore, titled Medical Errors: Causes, Consequences, Emotional Response, and Resulting Behavioral Change.1 The study reported the following findings:
Out of 130 residents surveyed, 128 admitted to some form of error. Serious errors accounted for 19%, minor errors for 48%, and near misses for 19%. Common causes included fatigue, long working hours, inadequate experience, lack of supervision, and complex cases.
Following these errors, 98% of participants became more cautious, 86% sought more advice from seniors, and 86% paid greater attention to details.
Despite these findings, journalists from both national and international media outlets misreported the study, claiming that “the majority of doctors in Pakistan make mistakes while treating patients, according to a study published in the Pakistan Journal of Medical Sciences.” This distorted message alarmed the study’s author, worried hospital administrators, and maligned the entire medical profession. The lead investigator sought my advice, and I recommended directing journalists to me for clarification.
The next day, a TV channel team visited my office to interview me about the study. Upon inquiry, it became evident that they did not understand the terms medical errors or near misses. I explained that they had misinterpreted the findings and refused to record an interview under false premises. Instead, I encouraged them to seek training in health reporting to avoid such errors. However, they were more interested in sensationalism than accuracy. Disappointed by my refusal to blame doctors, they did not correct their misleading report, leaving the damage unrectified.
Another example is a 2014 study from Peshawar by Usman Ahmad Raza and colleagues, titled Prescription Patterns of General Practitioners in Peshawar, Pakistan.2 The study found the following:
• Essential components of prescriptions were often missing.
• 58.5% of prescriptions were illegible.
• The physician’s name and registration number were absent in 89% and 92.8% of cases, respectively.
• 78% of prescriptions lacked a diagnosis or indication.
• Dosage and duration were missing in 63.8% and 55.4% of prescriptions, respectively.
• There was excessive prescribing of analgesics, antimicrobials, multivitamins, and anti-ulcer drugs.
Following its publication, the media widely misreported the study, stating that “the majority of doctors in Pakistan prescribe the wrong drugs to their patients, according to a study published in the Pakistan Journal of Medical Sciences.” In reality, the study highlighted the need for better training in rational prescribing and proper documentation. Once again, the media’s failure to accurately convey the findings misled the public and damaged the reputation of medical practitioners.
On another occasion, I was invited to a TV morning program where the host was surprised to hear me introduce myself as a medical journalist. He admitted that he had never heard of medical journalism—an astonishing admission that reflects the widespread ignorance within the media industry.
These examples underscore the importance of professionalism and ethics in journalism. Continuous professional development is vital for all professions, including journalism. Uninformed media professionals can disseminate misinformation with serious consequences. Having worked in medical journalism for over five decades, I still seek guidance.
References
- Bari A, Khan RA, Rathore AW. Medical errors; causes, consequences, emotional response and resulting behavioral change. Pak J Med Sci. 2016;32(3):523-528. doi: 10.12669/pjms.323.9701
- Raza UA, Khursheed T, Irfan M, Abbas M, Irfan UM. Prescription patterns of general practitioners in Peshawar, Pakistan. Pak J Med Sci. 2014;30(3):462-465. doi: 10.12669/pjms.303.4931
