Dataset Information

'Spin' in published biomedical literature: A methodological systematic review.

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.

SUBMITTER: Chiu K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5593172 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

'Spin' in published biomedical literature: A methodological systematic review.

Chiu Kellia K Grundy Quinn Q Bero Lisa L

PLoS biology 20170911 9

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 refer ...[more]

PMID: 28892482

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThere is an increasing need to evaluate the production and impact of medical research produced by institutions. Many indicators exist, yet we do not have enough information about their relevance. The objective of this systematic review was (1) to identify all the indicators that could be used to measure the output and outcome of medical research carried out in institutions and (2) enlist their methodology, use, positive and negative points.MethodologyWe have searched 3 databases (Pubmed, Scopus, Web of Science) using the following keywords: [Research outcome* OR research output* OR bibliometric* OR scientometric* OR scientific production] AND [indicator* OR index* OR evaluation OR metrics]. We included articles presenting, discussing or evaluating indicators measuring the scientific production of an institution. The search was conducted by two independent authors using a standardised data extraction form. For each indicator we extracted its definition, calculation, its rationale and its positive and negative points. In order to reduce bias, data extraction and analysis was performed by two independent authors.FindingsWe included 76 articles. A total of 57 indicators were identified. We have classified those indicators into 6 categories: 9 indicators of research activity, 24 indicators of scientific production and impact, 5 indicators of collaboration, 7 indicators of industrial production, 4 indicators of dissemination, 8 indicators of health service impact. The most widely discussed and described is the h-index with 31 articles discussing it.DiscussionThe majority of indicators found are bibliometric indicators of scientific production and impact. Several indicators have been developed to improve the h-index. This indicator has also inspired the creation of two indicators to measure industrial production and collaboration. Several articles propose indicators measuring research impact without detailing a methodology for calculating them. Many bibliometric indicators identified have been created but have not been used or further discussed.

Project description:Background: Osteomyelitis is an inflammatory process characterized by progressive bone destruction. Moreover, chronic bacterial osteomyelitis is regarded as a difficult-to-treat clinical entity due to its long-standing course and frequent infection recurrence. However, the role of genetic factors in the occurrence and development of bacterial osteomyelitis is poorly understood. Methods: We performed a systematic review to assess the frequency of individual alleles and genotypes of single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) among patients with bacterial osteomyelitis and healthy people to identify whether the SNPs are associated with the risk of developing bacterial osteomyelitis. Then, gene ontology and Kyoto Encyclopedia of Gene and Genomes analyses were performed to identify the potential biological effects of these genes on the pathogenesis of bacterial osteomyelitis. Result: Fourteen eligible studies containing 25 genes were analyzed. In this review, we discovered that the SNPs in IL1B, IL6, IL4, IL10, IL12B, IL1A, IFNG, TNF, PTGS2, CTSG, vitamin D receptor (VDR), MMP1, PLAT, and BAX increased the risk of bacterial osteomyelitis, whereas those in IL1RN and TLR2 could protect against osteomyelitis. The bioinformatic analysis indicated that these osteomyelitis-related genes were mainly enriched in inflammatory reaction pathways, suggesting that inflammation plays a vital role in the development of bacterial osteomyelitis. Furthermore, functional notation for 25 SNPs in 17 significant genes was performed using the RegulomeDB and NCBI databases. Four SNPs (rs1143627, rs16944, rs2430561, and rs2070874) had smaller scores from regulome analysis, implying significant biological function. Conclusion: We systematically summarized several SNPs linked to bacterial osteomyelitis and discovered that these gene polymorphisms could be a genetic factor for bacterial osteomyelitis. Moreover, further large-scale cohort studies are needed to enhance our comprehensive understanding of the development of osteomyelitis to provide earlier individualized preventions and interventions for patients with osteomyelitis in clinical practice.

Dataset Information

'Spin' in published biomedical literature: A methodological systematic review.

Publications

'Spin' in published biomedical literature: A methodological systematic review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets