Back to Search
Start Over
‘Spin’ in published biomedical literature: A methodological systematic review
- Source :
- PLoS Biology, Vol 15, Iss 9, p e2002173 (2017), PLoS Biology
- Publication Year :
- 2017
- Publisher :
- Public Library of Science (PLoS), 2017.
-
Abstract
- In the scientific literature, spin refers to reporting practices that distort the interpretation of results and mislead readers so that results are viewed in a more favourable light. The presence of spin in biomedical research can negatively impact the development of further studies, clinical practice, and health policies. This systematic review aims to explore the nature and prevalence of spin in the biomedical literature. We searched MEDLINE, PreMEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and hand searched reference lists for all reports that included the measurement of spin in the biomedical literature for at least 1 outcome. Two independent coders extracted data on the characteristics of reports and their included studies and all spin-related outcomes. Results were grouped inductively into themes by spin-related outcome and are presented as a narrative synthesis. We used meta-analyses to analyse the association of spin with industry sponsorship of research. We included 35 reports, which investigated spin in clinical trials, observational studies, diagnostic accuracy studies, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses. The nature of spin varied according to study design. The highest (but also greatest) variability in the prevalence of spin was present in trials. Some of the common practices used to spin results included detracting from statistically nonsignificant results and inappropriately using causal language. Source of funding was hypothesised by a few authors to be a factor associated with spin; however, results were inconclusive, possibly due to the heterogeneity of the included papers. Further research is needed to assess the impact of spin on readers’ decision-making. Editors and peer reviewers should be familiar with the prevalence and manifestations of spin in their area of research in order to ensure accurate interpretation and dissemination of research.<br />Author summary In the scientific literature, spin refers to reporting practices that distort the interpretation of results and mislead readers so that results are viewed in a more favourable light. The presence of spin in biomedical research can negatively impact the development of further studies, clinical practice, and health policies. We conducted a systematic review to explore the nature and prevalence of spin in the biomedical literature. We included 35 reports, which investigated spin in clinical trials, observational studies, diagnostic accuracy studies, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses. The nature of spin varied according to study design. The highest (but also greatest) variability in the prevalence of spin was present in trials. Some of the common practices used to spin results included detracting from statistically nonsignificant results and inappropriately using causal language. Source of funding was hypothesised by a few authors to be a factor associated with spin; however, results were inconclusive, possibly due to the heterogeneity of the included papers. Further research is needed to assess the impact of spin on readers’ decision-making. Editors and peer reviewers should be familiar with the prevalence and manifestations of spin in their area of research in order to ensure accurate interpretation and dissemination of research.
- Subjects :
- Biomedical Research
Cancer Treatment
Social Sciences
Scientific literature
law.invention
Governments
Mathematical and Statistical Techniques
0302 clinical medicine
Randomized controlled trial
law
Medicine and Health Sciences
Psychology
030212 general & internal medicine
Biology (General)
Language
General Neuroscience
Research Assessment
Surgical Oncology
Systematic review
Oncology
Research Design
Meta-analysis
Physical Sciences
Meta-Research Article
Observational Studies
Propaganda
Clinical Trial Reporting
General Agricultural and Biological Sciences
Statistics (Mathematics)
Prejudice
Clinical psychology
Clinical Oncology
Drug Research and Development
Systematic Reviews
QH301-705.5
Political Science
MEDLINE
Scopus
Biology
Research and Analysis Methods
General Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
03 medical and health sciences
Public Relations
Clinical Trials
Statistical Methods
Pharmacology
Publishing
General Immunology and Microbiology
Conflict of Interest
Cognitive Psychology
Biology and Life Sciences
Randomized Controlled Trials
Clinical trial
Cognitive Science
Observational study
Clinical Medicine
Mathematics
030217 neurology & neurosurgery
Meta-Analysis
Neuroscience
Subjects
Details
- ISSN :
- 15457885
- Volume :
- 15
- Database :
- OpenAIRE
- Journal :
- PLOS Biology
- Accession number :
- edsair.doi.dedup.....dfe9fbf25c9cf09722245d33164aa253