Spin in Published Reports of Tinnitus Randomized Controlled Trials: Evidence of Overinterpretation of Results.
Spin in Published Reports of Tinnitus Randomized Controlled Trials: Evidence of Overinterpretation of Results.
复制标题
DOI：
10.3389/fneur.2021.693937
复制
发表时间：
2021
影响因子：
3.4
通讯作者：
Stegeman I
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Velde HM;van Heteren JAA;Smit AL;Stegeman I
背景资料：Spin指的是可能扭曲解释并误导读者的报告实践，比结果更乐观，从而可能改变临床医生的看法并影响他们的决定。由于准确解释结果的临床重要性和其他研究领域的旋转证据，我们的目标是确定耳鸣随机对照试验（RCT）的已发表报告中旋转的性质和频率，并评估旋转的可能决定因素和影响。方法：我们系统地检索了PubMed中2015年至2019年发表的耳鸣相关结局的RCT。使用预先规定的标准对所有合格文章的实际和潜在旋转进行评估。结果：我们的检索确定了628项研究，其中87项符合评价条件。总共有95%的研究包含实际或潜在的旋转。实际旋转主要见于文章的结论中，其反映了报告的结局点估计值（或CI）以外的其他内容（n = 34，39%）或选择性关注（n = 49，56%）。17%的研究发现了语言旋转（“趋势”、“边缘显著”或“效果倾向”）。由于某些类别的研究特征的试验数量较少，我们无法评估研究特征与旋转发生率之间的相关性。我们发现，自旋对期刊类型[比值比（OR）-0.13，95% CI-0.56-0.31]、期刊影响因子（OR 0.17，95% CI-0.18-0.51）或引用次数（OR 1.95，CI-2.74-6.65）没有影响。结论：耳鸣随机对照试验中存在大量的自旋。我们的调查结果表明，在报告和解释结果方面还有改进的余地。必须提高对不同形式的旋转的认识，以提高研究质量，减少研究浪费。
Background: Spin refers to reporting practices that could distort the interpretation and mislead readers by being more optimistic than the results justify, thereby possibly changing the perception of clinicians and influence their decisions. Because of the clinical importance of accurate interpretation of results and the evidence of spin in other research fields, we aim to identify the nature and frequency of spin in published reports of tinnitus randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and to assess possible determinants and effects of spin. Methods: We searched PubMed systematically for RCTs with tinnitus-related outcomes published from 2015 to 2019. All eligible articles were assessed on actual and potential spin using prespecified criteria. Results: Our search identified 628 studies, of which 87 were eligible for evaluation. A total of 95% of the studies contained actual or potential spin. Actual spin was found mostly in the conclusion of articles, which reflected something else than the reported point estimate (or CI) of the outcome (n = 34, 39%) or which was selectively focused (n = 49, 56%). Linguistic spin (“trend,” “marginally significant,” or “tendency toward an effect”) was found in 17% of the studies. We were not able to assess the association between study characteristics and the occurrence of spin due to the low number of trials for some categories of the study characteristics. We found no effect of spin on type of journal [odds ratio (OR) −0.13, 95% CI −0.56–0.31], journal impact factor (OR 0.17, 95% CI −0.18–0.51), or number of citations (OR 1.95, CI −2.74–6.65). Conclusion: There is a large amount of spin in tinnitus RCTs. Our findings show that there is room for improvement in reporting and interpretation of results. Awareness of different forms of spin must be raised to improve research quality and reduce research waste.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
1.7
作者：
Arif, M.;Sadlier, M.;Tahir, T.
通讯作者：
Tahir, T.
影响因子：
38.9
作者：
Latronico, Nicola;Metelli, Marta;Minelli, Cosetta
通讯作者：
Minelli, Cosetta
影响因子：
3.7
作者：
Won, Jiyoon;Kim, Seoyeon;Lee, Hyangsook
通讯作者：
Lee, Hyangsook
影响因子：
5.8
作者：
Jellison, Samuel;Roberts, Will;Vassar, Matt
通讯作者：
Vassar, Matt
影响因子：
9
作者：
Arunachalam, Lakshmanan;Hunter, Iain A.;Killeen, Shane
通讯作者：
Killeen, Shane