Selective Citation Practices in Imaging Research: Are Diagnostic Accuracy Studies With Positive Titles and Conclusions Cited More Often?
Selective Citation Practices in Imaging Research: Are Diagnostic Accuracy Studies With Positive Titles and Conclusions Cited More Often?
复制标题
DOI：
10.2214/ajr.18.20977
复制
发表时间：
2019-08-01
影响因子：
5
通讯作者：
McInnes, Matthew D. F.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Treanor, Lee;Frank, Robert A.;McInnes, Matthew D. F.
OBJECTIVE.本研究的目的是检查是否存在选择性引用的做法，在影像学文献中，通过评估是否诊断准确性的研究，积极的标题或结论被引用的频率比那些负面（或中性）的标题或结论。材料和方法。在MEDLINE中检索了2005年1月至2016年4月在影像学期刊上发表的诊断准确性研究的荟萃分析。筛选荟萃分析的主要研究的合格性。标题和结论独立分类，一式两份。进行了控制几个混杂变量的负二项回归分析，以获得回归系数;通过似然比检验获得p值。共纳入995项主要研究。51个标题（5.1%）和782个结论（78.6%）是正面或正面的限定词; 942个标题（94.7%）和127个结论（12.8%）是中性的; 2个标题（0.02%）和86个结论（8.6%）是负面的。正面、中性和负面标题的研究平均每月被引用0.66、0.50和0.06次。正面、中性和负面结论的研究平均每月被引用0.54、0.42和0.34次。相对于负面标题，正面和中性标题的回归系数分别为1.10（95% CI，-0.08至2.20）和0.91（95% CI，-0.27至2.00）。相对于阴性结论，阳性和中性结论的回归系数分别为0.19（95%CI，0.03-0.35）和0.08（95%CI，-0.12至0.27）。标题和结论的积极性与引用率呈正相关（两者p = 0.031）。在成像诊断准确性文献中，具有肯定标题或结论的研究被引用的频率更高。这种差异可能会导致高估测试的准确性，从而导致患者结局不佳。
OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to examine the existence of selective citation practices in the imaging literature by assessing whether diagnostic accuracy studies with positive titles or conclusions are cited more frequently than those with negative (or neutral) titles or conclusions.MATERIALS AND METHODS. MEDLINE was searched for meta-analyses of diagnostic accuracy studies published in imaging journals from January 2005 to April 2016. Primary studies from the meta-analyses were screened for eligibility. Titles and conclusions were classified independently in duplicate. A negative binomial regression analysis controlling for several confounding variables was performed to obtain regression coefficients; p values were obtained via likelihood ratio testing.RESULTS. A total of 995 primary studies were included. Fifty-one titles (5.1%) and 782 conclusions (78.6%) were positive or positive with qualifiers; 942 titles (94.7%) and 127 conclusions (12.8%) were neutral; and two titles (0.02%) and 86 conclusions (8.6%) were negative. Studies with positive, neutral, and negative titles were cited a mean of 0.66, 0.50, and 0.06 times per month. Studies with positive, neutral, and negative conclusions were cited a mean of 0.54, 0.42, and 0.34 times per month. Regression coefficients were 1.10 (95% CI, -0.08 to 2.20) and 0.91 (95% CI, -0.27 to 2.00) for positive and neutral titles, relative to negative titles. Regression coefficients were 0.19 (95% CI, 0.03-0.35) and 0.08 (95% CI, -0.12 to 0.27) for positive and neutral conclusions, relative to negative conclusions. Title and conclusion positivity demonstrated positive association with citation rate (p = 0.031 for both).CONCLUSION. Studies with positive titles or conclusions are cited more frequently in imaging diagnostic accuracy literature. This difference may contribute to overestimation of the accuracy of a test and, consequently, suboptimal patient outcomes.