Abstract
Objectives
To describe the impact of peer reviewers on spin in reports of nonrandomized studies
assessing a therapeutic intervention.
Study Design and Setting
This is a systematic review and retrospective before–after study. The sample consists
of primary reports (n = 128) published in BioMed Central Medical Series journals between January 1, 2011,
and December 31, 2013. The main outcome measures are the following: number and type
of spin examples identified, deleted, or added by peer reviewers in the whole manuscript;
number of reports with spin in abstract conclusions not detected by peer reviewers;
the level of spin (i.e., no, low, moderate, and high level of spin) in the abstract
conclusions before and after the peer review.
Results
For 70 (55%) submitted manuscripts, peer reviewers identified at least one example
of spin. Of 123 unique examples of spin identified by peer reviewers, 82 (67%) were
completely deleted by the authors. For 19 articles (15%), peer reviewers requested
adding some spin, and for 11 (9%), the spin was added by the authors. Peer reviewers
failed to identify spin in abstract conclusions of 97 (76%) reports.
Conclusion
Peer reviewers identified many examples of spin in submitted manuscripts. However,
their influence on changing spin in the abstract conclusions was low.
Keywords
To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:
Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online accessOne-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:
Subscribe to Journal of Clinical EpidemiologyAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
References
- Reporting and interpretation of randomized controlled trials with statistically nonsignificant results for primary outcomes.JAMA. 2010; 303: 2058-2064
- Misrepresentation of randomized controlled trials in press releases and news coverage: a cohort study.PloS Med. 2012; 9: 11
- Comparison of registered and published primary outcomes in randomized controlled trials.JAMA. 2009; 302: 977-984
- Quality of reporting of noninferiority and equivalence randomized trials.JAMA. 2006; 295: 1147-1151
- Would a “one-handed” scientist lack rigor? How scientists discuss the work-relatedness of musculoskeletal disorders in formal and informal communications.Am J Ind Med. 2008; 51: 173-185
- Use of causal language in observational studies of obesity and nutrition.Obes Facts. 2010; 3: 353-356
- Bias in reporting of end points of efficacy and toxicity in randomized, clinical trials for women with breast cancer.Ann Oncol. 2013; 24: 1238-1244
- Deficient reporting and interpretation of non-inferiority randomized clinical trials in HIV patients: a systematic review.PLoS One. 2013; 8: e63272
- Listen to the data when results are not significant.BMJ. 2008; 336: 23-25
- Impact of spin in the abstract of articles reporting results of randomised controlled trials in the field of cancer, the SPIIN Randomised Controlled Trial.J Clin Oncol. 2014; 32: 4120-4126
- Impact of peer review on reports of randomised trials published in open peer review journals: retrospective before and after study.BMJ. 2014; 349: g4145
- Classification and prevalence of spin in abstracts of non-randomized studies evaluating an intervention.BMC Med Res Methodol. 2015; 15: 85
- Antihyperlipidemic effects of Pleurotus ostreatus (oyster mushrooms) in HIV-infected individuals taking antiretroviral therapy.BMC Complement Altern Med. 2011; 11: 1472-6882
- The efficacy of intravenous sodium valproate and phenytoin as the first-line treatment in status epilepticus: a comparison study.BMC Neurol. 2013; 13: 1471-2377
- Comparison of percutaneous radiofrequency thermal ablation and surgical resection for small hepatocellular carcinoma.BMC Gastroenterol. 2011; 11: 11-143
- Effect of an electronic nicotine delivery device (e-Cigarette) on smoking reduction and cessation: a prospective 6-month pilot study.BMC Public Health. 2011; 11: 1471-2458
- Differential outcome of concurrent radiotherapy plus epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors versus radiotherapy plus cisplatin in patients with human papillomavirus-related head and neck cancer.BMC Cancer. 2013; 13: 26
- Ginkgo biloba for the treatment of vitilgo vulgaris: an open label pilot clinical trial.BMC Complement Altern Med. 2011; 11: 1472-6882
- Internet-based cognitive behavior therapy for obsessive compulsive disorder: a pilot study.BMC Psychiatry. 2011; 11: 11-125
- High dose erythropoietin increases brain tissue oxygen tension in severe vasospasm after subarachnoid hemorrhage.BMC Neurol. 2012; 12: 1471-2377
- Noninvasive mechanical ventilation with average volume assured pressure support (AVAPS) in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and hypercapnic encephalopathy.BMC Pulm Med. 2013; 13: 1471-2466
- Who's afraid of peer review?.Science. 2013; 342: 60-65
- What errors do peer reviewers detect, and does training improve their ability to detect them?.J R Soc Med. 2008; 101: 507-514
- Assessment of adherence to the CONSORT statement for quality of reports on randomized controlled trial abstracts from four high-impact general medical journals.Trials. 2012; 13: 1745-6215
- Reviewer agreement trends from four years of electronic submissions of conference abstract.BMC Med Res Methodol. 2006; 6: 14
- Editorial peer review for improving the quality of reports of biomedical studies.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007; : MR000016
- CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials.BMC Med. 2010; 8: 1741-7015
- [Strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE): explanation and elaboration].Gac Sanit. 2009; 23: 26
- Does use of the CONSORT Statement impact the completeness of reporting of randomised controlled trials published in medical journals? A Cochrane review.Syst Rev. 2012; 1: 2046-4053
- Effect of using reporting guidelines during peer review on quality of final manuscripts submitted to a biomedical journal: masked randomised trial.BMJ. 2011; 343: d6783
- Overinterpretation and misreporting of diagnostic accuracy studies: evidence of “spin”.Radiology. 2013; 267: 581-588
Article info
Publication history
Published online: May 07, 2016
Accepted:
April 29,
2016
Identification
Copyright
© 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
