Peer reviewers identified spin in manuscripts of nonrandomized studies assessing therapeutic interventions, but their impact on spin in abstract conclusions was limited
- 7 May 2016
- journal article
- Published by Elsevier BV in Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
- Vol. 77, 44-51
- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2016.04.012
Abstract
No abstract availableThis publication has 28 references indexed in Scilit:
- Impact of Spin in the Abstracts of Articles Reporting Results of Randomized Controlled Trials in the Field of Cancer: The SPIIN Randomized Controlled TrialJournal of Clinical Oncology, 2014
- Deficient Reporting and Interpretation of Non-Inferiority Randomized Clinical Trials in HIV Patients: A Systematic ReviewPLOS ONE, 2013
- Bias in reporting of end points of efficacy and toxicity in randomized, clinical trials for women with breast cancerAnnals of Oncology, 2013
- Misrepresentation of Randomized Controlled Trials in Press Releases and News Coverage: A Cohort StudyPLoS Medicine, 2012
- Reporting and Interpretation of Randomized Controlled Trials With Statistically Nonsignificant Results for Primary OutcomesJAMA, 2010
- Use of Causal Language in Observational Studies of Obesity and NutritionObesity Facts, 2010
- Comparison of Registered and Published Primary Outcomes in Randomized Controlled TrialsJAMA, 2009
- Would a “one‐handed” scientist lack rigor? How scientists discuss the work‐relatedness of musculoskeletal disorders in formal and informal communicationsAmerican Journal of Industrial Medicine, 2008
- Listen to the data when results are not significantBMJ, 2008
- Quality of Reporting of Noninferiority and Equivalence Randomized TrialsJAMA, 2006