Evaluation of spin in the abstracts of otolaryngology randomized controlled trials

Craig M. Cooper, Harrison M. Gray, Andrew E. Ross, Tom A. Hamilton, Jaye Bea Downs, Cole Wayant, Matt Vassar

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Objective: Spin, the misrepresentation and distortion of research findings, has been shown to affect clinical decision making. Spin has been found in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in various fields of medicine, but no study has tested for the presence of spin in otolaryngology RCTs. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the abstracts of RCTs found in the otolaryngology literature for spin. Methods: In this cross-sectional analysis, we analyzed the abstracts of RCTs for spin using a pilot-tested form. Double data extraction was performed by two blinded authors, and discrepancies were resolved using mutual discussion. Results: Out of the 534 PubMed citations retrieved by our search string, 162 parallel-group RCTs with clearly defined primary and secondary endpoints were identified. Further analysis identified 47 trials with nonsignificant primary outcomes, which were then evaluated for spin. Spin was identified in 33 of the 47 (70%) abstracts. Spin was found in the results sections of 25 (53%) of the included abstracts and was found in the conclusion section of 27 (57%) of the abstracts. Spin was not present in the titles of any of the included studies. Conclusion: Spin was common in our sample of otolaryngology RCTs. Spin may potentially create false impressions about the true validity of a drug or intervention. Further research needs to test for potential clinical implications of spin in the otolaryngology literature. Level of Evidence: NA. Laryngoscope, 129:2036–2040, 2019.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)2036-2040
Number of pages5
JournalLaryngoscope
Volume129
Issue number9
DOIs
StatePublished - 1 Jan 2019

Fingerprint

Otolaryngology
Randomized Controlled Trials
Laryngoscopes
Research
PubMed
Cross-Sectional Studies
Medicine
Pharmaceutical Preparations

Keywords

  • Randomized controlled trials
  • abstracts
  • evidence-based medicine
  • spin

Cite this

@article{2264c8014aaf41f1acbb3fad181e8be3,
title = "Evaluation of spin in the abstracts of otolaryngology randomized controlled trials",
abstract = "Objective: Spin, the misrepresentation and distortion of research findings, has been shown to affect clinical decision making. Spin has been found in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in various fields of medicine, but no study has tested for the presence of spin in otolaryngology RCTs. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the abstracts of RCTs found in the otolaryngology literature for spin. Methods: In this cross-sectional analysis, we analyzed the abstracts of RCTs for spin using a pilot-tested form. Double data extraction was performed by two blinded authors, and discrepancies were resolved using mutual discussion. Results: Out of the 534 PubMed citations retrieved by our search string, 162 parallel-group RCTs with clearly defined primary and secondary endpoints were identified. Further analysis identified 47 trials with nonsignificant primary outcomes, which were then evaluated for spin. Spin was identified in 33 of the 47 (70{\%}) abstracts. Spin was found in the results sections of 25 (53{\%}) of the included abstracts and was found in the conclusion section of 27 (57{\%}) of the abstracts. Spin was not present in the titles of any of the included studies. Conclusion: Spin was common in our sample of otolaryngology RCTs. Spin may potentially create false impressions about the true validity of a drug or intervention. Further research needs to test for potential clinical implications of spin in the otolaryngology literature. Level of Evidence: NA. Laryngoscope, 129:2036–2040, 2019.",
keywords = "Randomized controlled trials, abstracts, evidence-based medicine, spin",
author = "Cooper, {Craig M.} and Gray, {Harrison M.} and Ross, {Andrew E.} and Hamilton, {Tom A.} and {Bea Downs}, Jaye and Cole Wayant and Matt Vassar",
year = "2019",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1002/lary.27750",
language = "English",
volume = "129",
pages = "2036--2040",
journal = "Laryngoscope",
issn = "0023-852X",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "9",

}

Evaluation of spin in the abstracts of otolaryngology randomized controlled trials. / Cooper, Craig M.; Gray, Harrison M.; Ross, Andrew E.; Hamilton, Tom A.; Bea Downs, Jaye; Wayant, Cole; Vassar, Matt.

In: Laryngoscope, Vol. 129, No. 9, 01.01.2019, p. 2036-2040.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Evaluation of spin in the abstracts of otolaryngology randomized controlled trials

AU - Cooper, Craig M.

AU - Gray, Harrison M.

AU - Ross, Andrew E.

AU - Hamilton, Tom A.

AU - Bea Downs, Jaye

AU - Wayant, Cole

AU - Vassar, Matt

PY - 2019/1/1

Y1 - 2019/1/1

N2 - Objective: Spin, the misrepresentation and distortion of research findings, has been shown to affect clinical decision making. Spin has been found in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in various fields of medicine, but no study has tested for the presence of spin in otolaryngology RCTs. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the abstracts of RCTs found in the otolaryngology literature for spin. Methods: In this cross-sectional analysis, we analyzed the abstracts of RCTs for spin using a pilot-tested form. Double data extraction was performed by two blinded authors, and discrepancies were resolved using mutual discussion. Results: Out of the 534 PubMed citations retrieved by our search string, 162 parallel-group RCTs with clearly defined primary and secondary endpoints were identified. Further analysis identified 47 trials with nonsignificant primary outcomes, which were then evaluated for spin. Spin was identified in 33 of the 47 (70%) abstracts. Spin was found in the results sections of 25 (53%) of the included abstracts and was found in the conclusion section of 27 (57%) of the abstracts. Spin was not present in the titles of any of the included studies. Conclusion: Spin was common in our sample of otolaryngology RCTs. Spin may potentially create false impressions about the true validity of a drug or intervention. Further research needs to test for potential clinical implications of spin in the otolaryngology literature. Level of Evidence: NA. Laryngoscope, 129:2036–2040, 2019.

AB - Objective: Spin, the misrepresentation and distortion of research findings, has been shown to affect clinical decision making. Spin has been found in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in various fields of medicine, but no study has tested for the presence of spin in otolaryngology RCTs. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the abstracts of RCTs found in the otolaryngology literature for spin. Methods: In this cross-sectional analysis, we analyzed the abstracts of RCTs for spin using a pilot-tested form. Double data extraction was performed by two blinded authors, and discrepancies were resolved using mutual discussion. Results: Out of the 534 PubMed citations retrieved by our search string, 162 parallel-group RCTs with clearly defined primary and secondary endpoints were identified. Further analysis identified 47 trials with nonsignificant primary outcomes, which were then evaluated for spin. Spin was identified in 33 of the 47 (70%) abstracts. Spin was found in the results sections of 25 (53%) of the included abstracts and was found in the conclusion section of 27 (57%) of the abstracts. Spin was not present in the titles of any of the included studies. Conclusion: Spin was common in our sample of otolaryngology RCTs. Spin may potentially create false impressions about the true validity of a drug or intervention. Further research needs to test for potential clinical implications of spin in the otolaryngology literature. Level of Evidence: NA. Laryngoscope, 129:2036–2040, 2019.

KW - Randomized controlled trials

KW - abstracts

KW - evidence-based medicine

KW - spin

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85059001378&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1002/lary.27750

DO - 10.1002/lary.27750

M3 - Article

C2 - 30578543

AN - SCOPUS:85059001378

VL - 129

SP - 2036

EP - 2040

JO - Laryngoscope

JF - Laryngoscope

SN - 0023-852X

IS - 9

ER -