Assessing the Presence of Spin in Abstracts of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses on Testicular Cancer Treatment, Screening, and Quality of Life: Cross-Sectional Analysis

Author:

Ferrell Sydney C1,Patel Parshvi2,Arthur Wade1,Ottwell Ryan1,Hartwell Micah1,Ostmo Daniel3,Woods William3,Narayan Vikram4,Wright Drew N5,Chen Suhao6,Miao Zhuqi7,Vassar Matt1

Affiliation:

1. Oklahoma State University Center for Health Sciences

2. Office of Medical Student Research, Oklahoma State University Center for Health Sciences; Kansas City University of Medicine and Biosciences, College of Osteopathic Medicine

3. Oklahoma State University Medical Center

4. Emory University School of Medicine

5. Weill Cornell Medical College

6. Oklahoma State University

7. Oklahoma State University, Stillwater

Abstract

Introduction Spin — reporting in a way that exaggerates benefits or minimizes harm — has been shown to affect a clinician’s perceptions of treatment efficacy. It is necessary to identify if spin is used in systematic reviews and meta-analyses due to their high degree of scientific evidence and usefulness in identifying the most appropriate clinical interventions. We aim to quantify the prevalence of spin in the abstracts of systematic reviews focused on testicular cancer. Design Systematic reviews related to testicular cancer were accessed using search strategies created for MEDLINE and Embase. To meet the inclusion criteria, a study must be a systematic review or meta-analysis examining testicular cancer screening, treatment, or quality of life. This cross-sectional study was performed in June of 2020. Investigators performed all screening, spin data extraction, and AMSTAR-2 appraisals in a masked, duplicate manner. In addition to evaluating spin in abstracts, associations between spin and particular study characteristics, and their methodological quality were analyzed. Results Our initial search returned 900 articles, of which 50 were included. Spin was present in 32.0% of these abstracts (16/50). We identified 7 of the 9 defined types of spin. Selective reporting of or overemphasis on harm favoring the safety of the experimental intervention was most prevalent, identified in 18% of the abstracts (9/50). Additionally, we found no significant association between spin and AMSTAR-2 appraisals or any other evaluated study characteristics. Conclusions Our findings illustrate the need for improved reporting accuracy in systematic reviews and meta-analyses related to testicular cancer. Because abstracts are often used by clinicians to guide clinical decisions, any misrepresentation of a systematic review’s findings could influence patient care.

Publisher

Hamilton Publishing Inc

Subject

General Earth and Planetary Sciences,General Environmental Science

Reference33 articles.

1. Evaluation of spin in the abstracts of systematic reviews and meta-analyses focused on cataract therapies;Simran Demla;American Journal of Ophthalmology,2021

2. Evaluating spin in the abstracts of systematic reviews and meta-analyses on cannabis use disorder;Adam Corcoran;Substance Abuse,2021

3. Evaluation of spin in the abstracts of systematic reviews and meta-analyses focused on treatments of alcohol use disorder;C. Verble;Am J Drug Alcohol Abuse,2021

4. Eight in Every 10 Abstracts of Low Back Pain Systematic Reviews Presented Spin and Inconsistencies With the Full Text: An Analysis of 66 Systematic Reviews;Dafne Port Nascimento;Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy,2020

5. How to Do a Systematic Review: A Best Practice Guide for Conducting and Reporting Narrative Reviews, Meta-Analyses, and Meta-Syntheses;Andy P. Siddaway;Annual Review of Psychology,2019

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3