‘Life‐changing surgery’: English‐language news media representation of selective dorsal rhizotomy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Selective dorsal rhizotomy (SDR) is a neurosurgical intervention to reduce spasticity in children with cerebral palsy. Parents researching SDR for their child may be influenced by framing of SDR in news media articles they read. This study examined framing of SDR in English-language news media. METHODS: Content analysis of English-language news media articles including the search term 'rhizotomy' in the Factiva database published July 2015 to July 2018 in online or print form in Canada, New Zealand, Australia, United States of America and the United Kingdom. RESULTS: One hundred and eighty-six articles were identified describing 91 different children (45 male), almost all with cerebral palsy, median age 4 years old. One hundred and twenty-six articles were written prior to surgery; in many articles, SDR surgery involved travel overseas and/or fundraising. SDR was described universally in positive terms with little discussion of risks. Content of articles variably included the specialized nature of SDR, parental frustration with their local health system and their hope for positive outcomes. There was geographical variation in both numbers of articles and content. CONCLUSIONS: SDR is a common focus in cerebral palsy news media articles in some countries. Framing in these articles supports SDR as a beneficial and specialized procedure and may lead families to believe they need to work outside their local health systems. As news media are likely an important influence on families' attitudes to SDR, clinicians should be aware of this influence.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".