I'm a freelance journalist, and I'm writing a piece examining pushbacks against evidence-based medicine (for instance, see the latest mammogram controversy in the U.S.) 

In particular, I'm exploring the role of belief in the uptake of EBM. In my reporting, I've found that new scientific evidence is often rejected when it contradicts strongly held (but erroneous) beliefs. It's not that people don't see the evidence, it's that they don't believe it (or they don't believe that it applies to them). 

I'm looking for research on the role of belief systems in the uptake of EBM. Has anyone studied ways to defeat scientifically wrong but strongly held beliefs via narrative? The idea being, that in some cases it's not the evidence itself that convinces, but instead, the story or narrative constructed from the evidence. How can new evidence be more effectively communicated when it contradicts established practice?

cheers,

Christie