PRO-SCIENCE
These sources consist of legitimate science or are evidence-based through the use of credible scientific sourcing. Legitimate science follows the scientific method, is unbiased, and does not use emotional words. These sources also respect the consensus of experts in the given scientific field and strive to publish peer-reviewed science. Some sources in this category may have a slight political bias but adhere to scientific principles. See all Pro-Science sources.
- Overall, we rate The Lancet Pro-Science and Very-High in factual reporting.
Detailed Report
Bias Rating: PRO-SCIENCE
Factual Reporting: VERY-HIGH
Country: United Kingdom
Press Freedom Rank: MOSTY FREE
Media Type: Journal
Traffic/Popularity: High Traffic
MBFC Credibility Rating: HIGH CREDIBILITY
History
Founded in 1823, The Lancet is a weekly peer-reviewed general medical journal. It is among the world’s oldest and best-known general medical journals. According to the Journal Citation Reports, the journal has a 2018 impact factor of 59.102, ranking it second after The New England Journal of Medicine in the category “Medicine, General & Internal.”
The current editor is Richard Horton.
Read our profile on the UK’s government and media.
Funded by / Ownership
The Lancet is owned and published by Elsevier, a Dutch information and analytics company and one of the world’s foremost providers of scientific, technical, and medical information. It was established in 1880 as a publishing company. Revenue is generated through subscriptions to both print and online journals and advertising and fees for access to individual studies.
Analysis / Bias
In review, The journal publishes original research articles, review articles, editorials, book reviews, correspondence, news features, and case reports. All research studies are peer-reviewed. The Lancet also publishes 17 speciality journals. Further, The Lancet is frequently sourced in significant publications such as the New York Times, Reuters, and numerous fact-checkers.
In the past, The Lancet has published studies that required retraction. For example, The Lancet was criticized after it published a paper in 1998 in which the authors suggested a link between the MMR vaccine and autism. This study was appropriately retracted in 2010.
Failed Fact Checks
- None in the Last 5 years. IFCN fact-checkers frequently use the Lancet.
Overall, we rate The Lancet Pro-Science and Very-High in factual reporting. (D. Van Zandt 5/22/2020) Updated (07/17/2022)
Source: https://www.thelancet.com/
Last Updated on July 1, 2023 by Media Bias Fact Check
Do you appreciate our work? Please consider one of the following ways to sustain us.
or
Left vs. Right Bias: How we rate the bias of media sources