Reframing is an intellectual process by which a situation that was initially experienced as unpleasant or judged as negative is viewed in such a way as to seem beneficial or positive.

For example:  Due to illness I was unable to go to work (negative situation) and missed the calamity that happened at work that day (positive).

Reframing is a spiritual tool that reduces stress and leads to more personal peace.

On occasion people will take scientific reports (primary literature) and report the results in a way that is inaccurate or misleading.  What is behind misrepresentation like this could be any of the following:

• The secondary article was written based on the abstract (summary of the study) instead of entire journal report.  Since it often costs money and takes effort to read a full report some secondary authors neglect to do this.  This is a problem because abstracts can exaggerate results by the way they are written.  (e.g. “A significant change in hot flashes” could mean that women had hot flashes 99 times a month instead of 100.  Scientifically significant, but not practically significant.)
• The secondary article was biased to promote the practice or drug or whatever was being studied, instead of being a balanced report.
• The author of the secondary article did not understand the study results.  Maybe the author doesn’t really know the difference between statistically significant and significant in a practical or real world sense.

These are reports, reviews, articles, books, etc that cite or talk about research studies or primary reports. They are “second hand” reports.

Contrast to primary literature:  Primary literature is a first hand report of something.  In the scientific realm this is a first report by the scientist(s) that did the study or research.