Suppr超能文献

电击枪研究的资金来源和作者单位与设备安全性的结论密切相关。

Funding source and author affiliation in TASER research are strongly associated with a conclusion of device safety.

机构信息

University of California, San Francisco, School of Medicine, San Francisco, CA 94143, USA.

出版信息

Am Heart J. 2011 Sep;162(3):533-7. doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2011.05.025. Epub 2011 Aug 9.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Controversy exists regarding the safety of electrical stun guns (TASERs). Much of the research on TASERs is funded by the maker of the device and, therefore, could be biased. We sought to determine if funding source or author affiliation is associated with TASER research conclusions.

METHODS

MEDLINE was searched for TASER or electrical stun gun to identify relevant studies. All human and animal studies published up to September 01, 2010, were included. Reviews, editorials, letters, and case reports were excluded from the analysis. Two independent reviewers blinded to this study hypothesis evaluated each article with regard to conclusions of TASER safety.

RESULTS

Fifty studies were reviewed: 32 (64%) were human studies and 18 (36%) were animal studies. Twenty-three (46%) studies were funded by TASER International or written by an author affiliated with the company. Of these, 22 (96%) concluded that TASERs are unlikely harmful (26%) or not harmful (70%). In contrast, of the 22 studies not affiliated with TASER, 15 (55%) concluded that TASERs are unlikely harmful (29%) or not harmful (26%). A study with any affiliation with TASER International had nearly 18 times higher odds to conclude that the TASER is likely safe as compared with studies without such affiliation (odds ratio 17.6, 95% CI 2.1-150.1, P = .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Studies funded by TASER and/or written by an author affiliated with the company are substantially more likely to conclude that TASERs are safe. Research supported by TASER International may thus be significantly biased in favor of TASER safety.

摘要

背景

电击枪(TASER)的安全性存在争议。对 TASER 的研究大多由该设备制造商提供资金,因此可能存在偏见。我们试图确定资金来源或作者隶属关系是否与 TASER 研究结论相关。

方法

通过 MEDLINE 搜索 TASER 或电击枪,以确定相关研究。纳入所有截至 2010 年 9 月 1 日发表的人类和动物研究。排除综述、社论、信件和病例报告。两位独立的评审员对这项研究假设不了解,对每篇文章关于 TASER 安全性的结论进行评估。

结果

共审查了 50 项研究:32 项(64%)为人类研究,18 项(36%)为动物研究。23 项(46%)研究由 TASER International 资助或由与该公司有关联的作者撰写。其中,22 项(96%)的结论是 TASER 不太可能有害(26%)或无害(70%)。相比之下,在 22 项与 TASER 无关的研究中,有 15 项(55%)的结论是 TASER 不太可能有害(29%)或无害(26%)。与 TASER International 有任何隶属关系的研究得出 TASER 很可能安全的结论的可能性几乎是没有这种隶属关系的研究的 18 倍(比值比 17.6,95%置信区间 2.1-150.1,P =.001)。

结论

由 TASER 资助和/或由与该公司有关联的作者撰写的研究更有可能得出 TASER 安全的结论。由 TASER International 支持的研究可能因此严重偏向于 TASER 安全。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验