Does a research article's country of origin affect perception of its quality and relevance? A national trial of US public health researchers

BMJ Open

Volumn 5, Issue 12, 2015, Pages

  Harris, M ^a   Macinko, J ^b   Jimenez, G ^c   Mahfoud, M ^d   Anderson, C ^e  

^a ST MARY S HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^c NANYANG TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY   (Singapore)

^d IMPERIAL COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^e Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation (MDRC)   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; HUMAN; LOWEST INCOME GROUP; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MODEL; PATIENT REFERRAL; PERCEPTION; PUBLIC HEALTH; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; RATING SCALE; STEREOTYPY; UNIVERSITY; DEVELOPED COUNTRY; DEVELOPING COUNTRY; FEMALE; LITERATURE; MALE; MEDICAL SCHOOL; MIDDLE AGED; PERSONNEL; PSYCHOLOGY; PUBLISHING; QUESTIONNAIRE; RESEARCH; SOCIOECONOMICS; STANDARDS; STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA; UNITED STATES;

DEVELOPED COUNTRIES; DEVELOPING COUNTRIES; FACULTY, MEDICAL; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PUBLIC HEALTH; PUBLICATION BIAS; RESEARCH; RESEARCH PERSONNEL; REVIEW LITERATURE AS TOPIC; SOCIOECONOMIC FACTORS; SURVEYS AND QUESTIONNAIRES; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84960427719     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20446055     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-008993     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. Kaptchuk T. Effect of interpretive bias on research evidence. BMJ 2003;326:1453-5.
2. Ferlie E, Fitzgerald L, Wood M, et al. The nonspread of innovations: the mediating role of professionals. Acad Manage J 2005;48:117-34.
3. Dearing J, Meyer G, Kazmierczak J. Portraying the new: communication between university innovators and potential users. Sci Commun 1994;16:11-42.
4. Fitzgerald L, Ferlie E, Wood M, et al. Interlocking interactions, the diffusion of innovations in health care. Hum Relations 2002;55:1429-49.
5. Bilkey W, Nes E. Country-of-origin effects on product evaluations. J Int Bus Stud 1982;13:89-100.
6. Peterson RA, Jansson S. A meta-Analysis of country-of-origin effects. J Int Bus Stud 1995;26:883-900.
7. Greenhalgh T, Robert G, Macfarlane F, et al. Diffusion of innovations in service organizations: systematic review and recommendations. Milbank Q 2004;82:581-629.
8. Damschroder L, Aron D, Keith R, et al. Fostering implementation of health services research findings into practice: a consolidated framework for advancing implementation science. Implement Sci 2009;4:50.
9. Tversky A, Kahneman D. The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science 1981;211:453-8.
10. Bargh J, Chen M, Burrows L. Automaticity of social behaviour: direct effects of trait construct and stereotype activation on action. J Pers Soc Psychol 1996;71:230-44.
11. Lord CG, Ross L, Lepper M. Biased assimilation and attitude polarization: the effects of prior theories on subsequently considered evidence. J Pers Soc Psychol 1979;37:2098-109.
12. MacCoun RJ. Biases in the interpretation and use of research results. Annu Rev Psychol 1998;49:259-87.
13. Tversky A, Kahneman D. Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Science 1974;185:1124-31.
14. Harris M. Research papers should omit their authors' affiliations. BMJ 2014;349:g6439.
15. Yousefi-Nooraie R, Shakiba B, Mortaz-Hejri S. Country development and manuscript selection bias: a review of published studies. BMC Med Res Methodol 2006;6:37.
16. Horton R. North and South: bridging the information gap. Lancet 2000;355:2231-6.
17. Patel V, Sumathipala A. International representation in psychiatric literature: survey of six leading journals. Br J Psychiatry 2001;178:406-9.
18. Mendis S, Yach D, Bengoa R, et al. Research gap in cardiovascular disease in developing countries. Lancet 2003;361:2246-7.
19. Yach D, Kenya P. Assessment of epidemiological and HIV/AIDS publications in Africa. Int J Epidemiol 1992;21:557-60.
20. Singh D. Publication bias-A reason for the decreased research output in developing countries. S Afr Psychiatry Rev 2006;9:153-5.
21. Keiser J, Utzinger J, Tanner M,, et al. Representation of authors and editors from countries with different human development indexes in the leading literature on tropical medicine: survey of current evidence. BMJ 2004;328:1229-32.
22. Opthofa T, Coronel R, Jansed M. The significance of the peer review process against the background of bias: priority ratings of reviewers and editors and the prediction of citation, the role of geographical bias. Cardiovasc Res 2002;56:339-46.
23. Link AM. US and non-US submissions. An analysis of reviewer bias. JAMA 1998;280:246-7.
24. Tutarel O. Composition of the editorial boards of leading medical education journals. BMC Med Res Methodol 2004;4:3.
25. Winnik S, Speer T, Raptis D, et al. The wealth of nations and the dissemination of cardiovascular research. Int J Cardiol 2013;169:190-5.
26. Peters DP, Ceci SJ. Peer-review practices of psychological journals: the fate of published articles, submitted again. Behav Brain Sci 1982;5:187-255.
27. Kliewer M, DeLong D, Freed K, et al. Peer review at the American Journal of Roentgenology: how reviewer and manuscript characteristics affected editorial decisions on 196 major papers. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2004;183:1545-50.
28. Kirkwood B, Sterne J. Essentials of medical statistics. Oxford: Blackwell Science, 2003.
29. Wakefield AJ, Murch SH, Anthony A, et al. RETRACTED: ileal-lymphoid-nodular hyperplasia, non-specific colitis, and pervasive developmental disorder in children. Lancet 1998;351:637-41.
30. Abeygunasekera A. Learning from low income countries: what are the lessons? Effective surgery can be cheap and innovative. BMJ 2004;329:1185.
31. Dogra N, Omigbodun O. Learning from low income countries: what are the lessons? Partnerships in mental health are possible without multidisciplinary teams. BMJ 2004;329:1184.
32. McKenzie K, Patel V, Araya R. Learning from low income countries: mental health. BMJ 2004;329:1138.
33. Swartz HA, Rollman BL. Managing the global burden of depression: lessons from the developing world. World Psychiatry 2003;2:3.
34. Susser E, Collins P, Schanzer B, et al. Topics for our times: can we learn from the care of persons with mental illness in developing countries? Am J Public Health 1996;86:7.
35. Rosen A. Destigmatizing day-to-day practices: what developed countries can learn from developing countries. World Psychiatry 2006;5:1.
36. Haines A, Sanders D, Lehmann U, et al. Achieving child survival goals: potential contribution of community health workers. Lancet 2007;369:2121-31.
37. Haider R, Ashworth A, Kabir I, et al. Effect of community-based peer counsellors on exclusive breastfeeding practices in Dhaka, Bangladesh: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2000;356:1643-7.
38. Kumar V, Mohanty S, Kumar A, et al. Effect of community-based behaviour change management on neonatal mortality in Shivgarh, Uttar Pradesh, India: a cluster-randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2008;372:1151-62.
39. Syed S, Dadwal V, Martin G. Reverse innovation in global health systems: towards global innovation flow. Global Health 2013;9:36 (30 August 2013).
40. Wright J, Walley J, Philip A, et al. Research into practice: 10 years of international public health partnership between the UK and Swaziland. J Public Health 2010;32:277-82.
41. Baguley D, Killeen T, Wright J. International health links: an evaluation of partnerships between health-care organizations in the UK and developing countries. Trop Doct 2006;36:149.
42. Lam CLK. Knowledge can flow from developing to developed countries. BMJ 2000;321:830.
43. Berwick D. Lessons from developing nations on improving health care. BMJ 2004;328:1124-9.
44. Crisp N. Turning the world upside down. RSM books, 2010.
45. Cook C, Heath F, Thompson R. A meta-Analysis of response rates in web-or internet-based surveys. Educ Psychol Meas 2000;60:821-36.
46. Malmivaara A. Methodological considerations of the GRADE method. Ann Med 2015;47:1-5.
47. Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carroll D, et al. Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary? Control Clin Trials 1996;17:1-12.
48. Balshem H, Helfand M, Schünemann HJ, et al. GRADE guidelines: 3. Rating the quality of evidence. J Clin Epidemiol 2011;64:401-6.
49. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Vist G, et al. GRADE guidelines: 4. Rating the quality of evidence-study limitations (risk of bias). J Clin Epidemiol 2011;64:407-15.
50. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Kunz R, et al. GRADE guidelines: 7. Rating the quality of evidence-inconsistency. J Clin Epidemiol 2011;64:1294-302.
51. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Kunz R, et al. GRADE guidelines: 8. Rating the quality of evidence-indirectness. J Clin Epidemiol 2011;64:1303-10.
52. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Kunz R, et al. GRADE guidelines 6. Rating the quality of evidence-imprecision. J Clin Epidemiol 2011;64:1283-93.
53. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Montori V, et al. GRADE guidelines: 5. Rating the quality of evidence-publication bias. J Clin Epidemiol 2011;64:1277-82.
54. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Sultan S, et al. GRADE guidelines: 9. Rating up the quality of evidence. J Clin Epidemiol 2011;64:1311-16.
55. Harris M, Weisberger E, Silver D,, et al. 'They hear "Africa" and they think that there can't be any good services'-perceived context in cross-national learning: a qualitative study of the barriers to Reverse Innovation. Global Health 2015;11:45.
56. Rennie D, Flanagin A, Godlee F, et al. Eighth international congress on peer review in biomedical publication. BMJ 2015;350:h2411.