Hamdan Diana, Niewchas Abbigail, Ngo Ambrose Loc T, Weaver Michael
College of Osteopathic Medicine, Kansas City University of Medicine and Biosciences, Joplin, USA.
Department of Internal Medicine, Freeman Health System/Kansas City University Graduate Medical Education Consortium, Joplin, USA.
Cureus. 2025 May 26;17(5):e84840. doi: 10.7759/cureus.84840. eCollection 2025 May.
In scientific reporting, 'spin' refers to presenting neutral or negative outcomes in a manner that infers favorable results. Spin can be especially problematic in the abstracts of randomized control trials, leading to an incorrect interpretation of trial outcomes, and potentially impacting subsequent studies, patient care, and policy decisions. The present study aims to evaluate the presence of spin in the abstracts of registered randomized control trials published in allergy and immunology journals. A systematic search of the PubMed database was performed to identify randomized controlled trials of human subjects registered in a clinical trial registry with a test and control group and a nonsignificant primary endpoint. A total of 1,248 articles were screened and 66 abstracts met full inclusion criteria. Thirty-five of the 66 (53%) abstracts were found to contain one or more elements of spin, among which 11 (31.4%) had spin in the title, 29 (82.9%) in the abstract results, and 30 (85.7%) in the abstract conclusion. Industry-sponsored trials did not contain more spin compared to other funding sources (p=0.62). High rates of spin may adversely affect the interpretation and integration of new research. Careful evaluation is recommended when reviewing abstracts lacking statistically significant primary outcomes.
在科学报告中,“倾向性表述”是指以暗示有利结果的方式呈现中性或负面结果。倾向性表述在随机对照试验的摘要中可能尤其成问题,会导致对试验结果的错误解读,并可能影响后续研究、患者护理和政策决策。本研究旨在评估发表在过敏和免疫学杂志上的已注册随机对照试验摘要中倾向性表述的情况。对PubMed数据库进行了系统检索,以确定在临床试验注册机构注册的、有试验组和对照组且主要终点无统计学意义的人体随机对照试验。共筛选了1248篇文章,66篇摘要符合完全纳入标准。66篇摘要中有35篇(53%)被发现包含一个或多个倾向性表述元素,其中11篇(31.4%)在标题中有倾向性表述,29篇(82.9%)在摘要结果中有倾向性表述,30篇(85.7%)在摘要结论中有倾向性表述。与其他资金来源相比,行业资助的试验中倾向性表述并不更多(p = 0.62)。倾向性表述的高比例可能会对新研究的解读和整合产生不利影响。在审查缺乏统计学显著主要结果的摘要时,建议进行仔细评估。