Purpose: Our aim was to analyze the communications about three outstanding medical reports. Was there any difference in the reports of the three allografts? Was there a correlation between the media and the scientific world?
Methods: The Internet sites of three major newspapers were used for the media database. Those results were compared with PubMed between 2005 and 2007 using these key words: "facial graft," "facial allograft," "composite tissue allograft," and names of surgeons of the graft. We did a comparative analysis using a word processor and a quality analysis software.
Results: We analyzed 51 articles from the media and six from the PubMed database. In PubMed, 100% of the articles were on the first graft and respected the privacy of the patient compared to 67% of the media who unveiled the identity.
Conclusion: The communication following a medical premiere depends on the team, which performes the act. We observed a major difference between the three cases. Ethical considerations are different for the media and for scientists. The communication management of a medical premiere takes preparation and evaluation.