Evaluation of "Spin" in the Abstracts of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Focused on Cataract Therapies

被引:6
作者
Demla, Simran [1 ]
Shinn, Erin [1 ,2 ]
Ottwell, Ryan [1 ]
Arthur, Wade [1 ]
Khattab, Mostafa [1 ]
Hartwell, Micah [1 ,4 ]
Wright, Drew N. [3 ]
Vassar, Matt [1 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Oklahoma State Univ, Ctr Hlth Sci, Off Med Student Res, Tulsa, OK 74107 USA
[2] Arkansas Coll Osteopath Med, Ft Smith, AR USA
[3] Weill Cornell Med Coll, Samuel J Wood Lib & CV Starr Biomed Informat Ctr, New York, NY USA
[4] Oklahoma State Univ, Ctr Hlth Sci, Dept Psychiat & Behav Sci, Tulsa, OK 74107 USA
关键词
D O I
10.1016/j.ajo.2021.03.032
中图分类号
R77 [眼科学];
学科分类号
100212 ;
摘要
PURPOSE: "Spin," a slang term meaning the misrepresentation of study findings such that the beneficial effects of an intervention are magnified beyond what the results actually show, is a reporting practice that has been shown to influence perceptions of treatment efficacy and clinical decision making. The extent of spin and its complications were evaluated in the abstracts of systematic reviews of cataract surgery. The issue of whether particular study attributes were associated with spin was also evaluated. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. METHODS: MEDLINE and Embase were searched for systematic reviews and meta-analyses relating to cataract treatment. From these search records, eligible studies were screened in duplicate. A previously developed classification system for spin was used to assess the systematic reviews that met eligibility criteria for the occurrence of the 9 most severe forms of spin. Evaluation of spin, extracted study characteristics, and appraisal of the methodological quality of each study were performed using the 16-question A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews (AMSTAR-2) scale in duplicate. RESULTS: Searches retrieved 2,059 studies, of which 110 were eligible for data extraction. At least 1 form of spin was found in 30.0% of included systematic reviews (33 of 110). Six of the 9 types of spin were identified in the study sample, the most common being type 3 in 18.2% (20 of 110) of abstracts. No significant associations were found among spin in abstracts, AMSTAR-2 appraisal, and any of the extracted study characteristics. RESULTS: Searches retrieved 2,059 studies, of which 110 were eligible for data extraction. At least 1 form of spin was found in 30.0% of the included systematic re-views (33 of 110). Six of the 9 types of spin were identified in the sample, the most common being type 3 in 18.2% (20 of 110) of abstracts. No significant associations were found among spin in abstracts, AMSTAR-2 appraisals, and any of the extracted study characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: Spin was evident in approximately one-third of the abstracts of evaluated systematic reviews and meta-analyses of cataract surgery and associated complications. ((C) 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)
引用
收藏
页码:47 / 57
页数:11
相关论文
共 44 条
[1]   Evaluation of spin within abstracts in obesity randomized clinical trials: A cross-sectional review [J].
Austin, J. ;
Smith, C. ;
Natarajan, K. ;
Som, M. ;
Wayant, C. ;
Vassar, M. .
CLINICAL OBESITY, 2019, 9 (02)
[2]  
Barry H C, 2001, J Am Board Fam Pract, V14, P437
[3]   Impact of Spin in the Abstracts of Articles Reporting Results of Randomized Controlled Trials in the Field of Cancer: The SPIIN Randomized Controlled Trial [J].
Boutron, Isabelle ;
Altman, Douglas G. ;
Hopewell, Sally ;
Vera-Badillo, Francisco ;
Tannock, Ian ;
Ravaud, Philippe .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2014, 32 (36) :4120-U346
[4]   Risk Factors for Intraoperative Floppy Iris Syndrome: A Meta-Analysis [J].
Chatziralli, Irini P. ;
Sergentanis, Theodoros N. .
OPHTHALMOLOGY, 2011, 118 (04) :730-735
[5]  
Cochrane Eyes and Vision, CEV US DAT SYST REV
[6]   Evaluation of spin in the abstracts of otolaryngology randomized controlled trials [J].
Cooper, Craig M. ;
Gray, Harrison M. ;
Ross, Andrew E. ;
Hamilton, Tom A. ;
Bea Downs, Jaye ;
Wayant, Cole ;
Vassar, Matt .
LARYNGOSCOPE, 2019, 129 (09) :2036-2040
[7]   Updated guidance for trusted systematic reviews: a new edition of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions [J].
Cumpston, Miranda ;
Li, Tianjing ;
Page, Matthew J. ;
Chandler, Jacqueline ;
Welch, Vivian A. ;
Higgins, Julian P. T. ;
Thomas, James .
COCHRANE DATABASE OF SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS, 2019, (10)
[8]  
Davis Geetha, 2016, Mo Med, V113, P58
[9]   Phacoemulsification with posterior chamber intraocular lens versus extracapsular cataract extraction (ECCE) with posterior chamber intraocular lens for age-related cataract [J].
de Silva, Samantha R. ;
Riaz, Yasmin ;
Evans, Jennifer R. .
COCHRANE DATABASE OF SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS, 2014, (01)
[10]   Topical anaesthesia alone versus topical anaesthesia with intracameral lidocaine for phacoemulsification [J].
Ezra, D. G. ;
Allan, B. D. .
COCHRANE DATABASE OF SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS, 2007, (03)