Smartphones aren't making millennials grow horns. Here's how to spot a bad study

[JimGinPA]

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/science/smartphones-arent-making-millennials-grow-horns-heres-how-to-spot-a-bad-study?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=pbsofficial&utm_campaign=newshour

Science Jun 25, 2019 12:05 PM EDT — Updated on Jun 25, 2019 5:36 PM EDT

It’s the kind of story that could sound true, but seems off.

That was the feeling I got last week, when a Washington Post article — “Horns are growing on young people’s skulls. Phone use is to blame, research suggests” — appeared in my email inbox.

The report covers a 2018 study published in Scientific Reports, which used head X-rays of 1,200 chiropractic patients to claim that young adults aged 18 to 30 are growing bone masses on the backs of their skulls, a supposed phenomenon that The Washington Post described as “horns” (which are technically bone spurs called enlarged external occipital protuberances — EEOPs or EOPs).

A week before The Washington Post article, BBC Future published a feature story on “How modern life is transforming the human skeleton,” which featured the same study from Scientific Reports.

The original study and both news stories — which have gone viral, picked up by dozens more outlets in recent days — link these alleged bone deformities to the use of mobile technology, specifically because users are bending “their heads forward to make sense of what’s happening on the miniature screens,” as the Post wrote.

There’s one problem.

The researchers “haven’t provided the data to back up their claim,” said John Hawks, a paleoanthropologist at the University of Wisconsin, who studies human evolution and was not involved in the study.

On a basic level, the study has flaws, namely that it makes written claims that are not supported by the numbers, images and other data reported in the study itself. This isn’t a situation where a research group made a controversial discovery, and other scientists simply disagree.

~Snip

This isn’t the first time thin research has gone viral, but this episode involves more than just a study with a few flaws.

This story became popular in part due to the nature of the modern media landscape, specifically how news organizations re-report stories, and how quickly stories steeped in moral panic are shared on social media. And recent research tells us that it is difficult, if not impossible, to correct a viral story once it has invaded the zeitgeist.

~More at link

[jberryhill]

1. Thanks

[hlthe2b]

2. Sigh... Years ago, tv networks, major radio news outlets, magazines and other media hired

Science editors who, regardless of discipline typically knew how to critically read, evaluate, and interpret a published study. Often they hired epidemiologists who could not only do so with general scientific studies, but medical literature and general health issues as well. Then they moved to sporadically grab a physician here and there to do a "medical spot" and asked them to do double duty on the former tasks as well. That works out fine if it is a physician who has extra training in research or epidemiology, but many do not. And of course, the final evolution is not to have anyone specifically trained review these "news spots" and the studies they are based on-- at all. Saves $$, you see.

So, we are surprised that this kind of crap gets disseminated? Sadly, no.

[Codeine]

3. I'm irritated; I really wanted some horns. nt

[Tech]

4. My 8 year old grandson will be disappointed

We have been checking him for the horn

[BigmanPigman]

5. I saw that picture and article on my Google tablet page.

When I saw the "horn" was on the back and bottom of the skull I said that it looked like another waste of time "study" and moved on.