Development of Indicators for Evaluating the Content Quality of Media Reports on Road Traffic Crashes
1
Department of Epidemiology and Health Statistics, Xiangya School of Public Health, Central South University, Changsha, China
2
Department of Child, Adolescent and Women's Health, School of Public Health, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China
Popul. Med. 2026;8(Supplement Supplement 1):
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND:
With the rapid evolution of the media landscape, media reporting has become increasingly influential in social governance such as road traffic injury prevention. However, there is a lack of objective and practical tools for evaluating content quality, which are essential for real-time monitoring of the vast volume of media reports on this topic.
METHODS:
A three-phase study was conducted. First, based on relevant laws and journalistic guidelines, we established an operational definition of content quality for media reports on road traffic crashes and developed a conceptual framework to guide the indicator formulation. Second, through a literature review and multiple rounds of group discussions, we drafted an initial set of indicators according to predefined principles. Finally, we conducted a Delphi consultation from July to September 2025 to finalize the indicators. This process involved two rounds of online consultations with 15 experts in injury prevention, journalism, social governance, and jurisprudence.
RESULTS:
Drawing from research publications, legislative documents, and journalistic guidelines, we drafted a pool of 78 indicators across 19 domains. Through iterative group discussions guided by three core principles—adherence to laws and journalistic guidelines, objective measurability, and reliance solely on data available within media reports—this set was refined to 14 indicators across 3 dimensions. Following the two-round Delphi consultation, we finally formulated 15 indicators across 3 dimensions: normativity, objectivity, and safety advocacy. The expert panel demonstrated acceptable consensus, with average scores of 7 points or higher (maximal value: 10 points) and coefficients of variation within 0.25 for both importance and feasibility across all dimensions and indicators.
CONCLUSIONS:
These law- and guideline-driven quality evaluation indicators effectively reflect the content requirements for media reports on road traffic crashes. They can serve as a practical tool for government agencies, media platforms, and journalists to monitor and enhance the content quality on road traffic crashes.
With the rapid evolution of the media landscape, media reporting has become increasingly influential in social governance such as road traffic injury prevention. However, there is a lack of objective and practical tools for evaluating content quality, which are essential for real-time monitoring of the vast volume of media reports on this topic.
METHODS:
A three-phase study was conducted. First, based on relevant laws and journalistic guidelines, we established an operational definition of content quality for media reports on road traffic crashes and developed a conceptual framework to guide the indicator formulation. Second, through a literature review and multiple rounds of group discussions, we drafted an initial set of indicators according to predefined principles. Finally, we conducted a Delphi consultation from July to September 2025 to finalize the indicators. This process involved two rounds of online consultations with 15 experts in injury prevention, journalism, social governance, and jurisprudence.
RESULTS:
Drawing from research publications, legislative documents, and journalistic guidelines, we drafted a pool of 78 indicators across 19 domains. Through iterative group discussions guided by three core principles—adherence to laws and journalistic guidelines, objective measurability, and reliance solely on data available within media reports—this set was refined to 14 indicators across 3 dimensions. Following the two-round Delphi consultation, we finally formulated 15 indicators across 3 dimensions: normativity, objectivity, and safety advocacy. The expert panel demonstrated acceptable consensus, with average scores of 7 points or higher (maximal value: 10 points) and coefficients of variation within 0.25 for both importance and feasibility across all dimensions and indicators.
CONCLUSIONS:
These law- and guideline-driven quality evaluation indicators effectively reflect the content requirements for media reports on road traffic crashes. They can serve as a practical tool for government agencies, media platforms, and journalists to monitor and enhance the content quality on road traffic crashes.
| eISSN: | 2654-1459 |
We process personal data collected when visiting the website. The function of obtaining information about users and their behavior is carried out by voluntarily entered information in forms and saving cookies in end devices. Data, including cookies, are used to provide services, improve the user experience and to analyze the traffic in accordance with the Privacy policy. Data are also collected and processed by Google Analytics tool (more).
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
