Overinterpretation of research findings: Evidence of "spin" in systematic reviews of diagnostic accuracy studies

Clinical Chemistry

Volumn 63, Issue 8, 2017, Pages 1353-1362

  McGrath, Trevor A ^a   McInnes, Matthew D F ^b   Van Es, Nick ^c   Leeflang, Mariska M G ^c   Korevaar, Daniël A ^c   Bossuyt, Patrick M M ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OTTAWA   (Canada)

^b OTTAWA HOSPITAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Canada)

^c ACADEMIC MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CONSENSUS; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC TEST ACCURACY STUDY; HUMAN; MEDLINE; META ANALYSIS; OPTIMISM; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; TASK PERFORMANCE; MEDICAL TECHNOLOGY; META ANALYSIS (TOPIC); REPRODUCIBILITY; STANDARDS;

HUMANS; MEDICAL LABORATORY SCIENCE; META-ANALYSIS AS TOPIC; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS;

EID: 85026538278     PISSN: 00099147     EISSN: 15308561     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1373/clinchem.2017.271544     Document Type: Review

References (32)

1. Singh H, Graber ML. Improving diagnosis in health care-the next imperative for patient safety. N Engl J Med 2015;373:2493-5.
2. Singh H, Meyer AN, Thomas EJ. The frequency of diagnostic errors in outpatient care: Estimations from three large observational studies involving us adult populations. BMJ Qual Saf 2014;23:727-31.
3. Ioannidis JP. The mass production of redundant, misleading, and conflicted systematic reviews and metaanalyses. Milbank Q 2016;94:485-514.
4. Scherer RW, Langenberg P, von Elm E. Full publication of results initially presented in abstracts. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2007;(2):MR000005.
5. Schmucker C, Schell LK, Portalupi S, Oeller P, Cabrera L, Bassler D, et al. Extent of non-publication in cohorts of studies approved by research ethics committees or included in trial registries. PLoS One 2014;9:e114023.
6. Song F, Parekh-Bhurke S, Hooper L, Loke YK, Ryder JJ, Sutton AJ, et al. Extent of publication bias in different categories of research cohorts: A meta-analysis of empirical studies. BMC Med Res Methodol 2009;9:79.
7. Boutron I, Dutton S, Ravaud P, Altman DG. Reporting and interpretation of randomized controlled trials with statistically nonsignificant results for primary outcomes. JAMA 2010;303:2058 -64.
8. Latronico N, Metelli M, Turin M, Piva S, Rasulo FA, Minelli C. Quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials published in Intensive Care Medicine from 2001 to 2010. Intensive Care Med 2013;39:1386 -95.
9. Le Fourn E, Giraudeau B, Chosidow O, Doutre MS, Lorette G. Study design and quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials of chronic idiopathic or autoimmune urticaria: Review. PLoS One 2013;8:e70717.
10. Patel SV, Chadi SA, Choi J, Colquhoun PH. The use of "spin" in laparoscopic lower GI surgical trials with nonsignificant results: An assessment of reporting and interpretation of the primary outcomes. Dis Colon Rectum 2013;56:1388 -94.
11. Patel SV, Van Koughnett JA, Howe B, Wexner SD. Spin is common in studies assessing robotic colorectal surgery: An assessment of reporting and interpretation of study results. Dis Colon Rectum 2015;58:878 -84.
12. Arunachalam L, Hunter IA, Killeen S. Reporting of randomized controlled trials with statistically nonsignificant primary outcomes published in highimpact surgical journals. Ann Surg 2017;265: 1141-5.
13. Gewandter JS, McKeown A, McDermott MP, Dworkin JD, Smith SM, Gross RA, et al. Data interpretation in analgesic clinical trials with statistically nonsignificant primary analyses: An ACTTION systematic review. J Pain 2015;16:3-10.
14. Lockyer S, Hodgson R, Dumville JC, Cullum N. "Spin" in wound care research: The reporting and interpretation of randomized controlled trials with statistically nonsignificant primary outcome results or unspecified primary outcomes. Trials 2013;14:371.
15. Lazarus C, Haneef R, Ravaud P, Boutron I. Classification and prevalence of spin in abstracts of non-randomized studies evaluating an intervention. BMC Med Res Methodol 2015;15:85.
16. Ochodo EA, de Haan MC, Reitsma JB, Hooft L, Bossuyt PM, Leeflang MM. Overinterpretation and misreporting of diagnostic accuracy studies: Evidence of "spin". Radiology 2013;267:581-8.
17. Lumbreras B, Parker LA, Porta M, Pollán M, Ioannidis JP, Hernández-Aguado I. Overinterpretation of clinical applicability in molecular diagnostic research. Clin Chem 2009;55:786 -94.
18. Boutron I, Altman DG, Hopewell S, Vera-Badillo F, Tannock I, Ravaud P. Impact of spin in the abstracts of articles reporting results of randomized controlled trials in the field of cancer: The SPIN randomized controlled trial. J Clin Oncol 2014;32:4120 -6.
19. Yavchitz A, Ravaud P, Altman DG, Moher D, Hrobjartsson A, Lasserson T, Boutron I. A new classification of spin in systematic reviews and meta-analyses was developed and ranked according to the severity. J Clin Epidemiol 2016;75:56 -65.
20. McGovern A, Pendlebury ST, Mishra NK, Fan Y, Quinn TJ. Test accuracy of informant-based cognitive screening tests for diagnosis of dementia and multidomain cognitive impairment in stroke. Stroke 2016;47:329 -35.
21. Huang W, Zhang Y, Yao Z, Ma L. Clinical examination of anterior cruciate ligament rupture: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc 2016; 50:22-31.
22. Lazarus C, Haneef R, Ravaud P, Hopewell S, Altman DG, Boutron I. Peer reviewers identified spin in manuscripts of nonrandomized studies assessing therapeutic interventions, but their impact on spin in abstract conclusions was limited. J Clin Epidemiol 2016;77: 44 -51.
23. Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977;33: 159 -74.
24. Whiting PF, Rutjes AW, Westwood ME, Mallett S, Deeks JJ, Reitsma JB, et al. QUADAS-2: A revised tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies. Ann Intern Med 2011;155:529 -36.
25. McInnesM, MoherD, Bossuyt P. Development and implementation of a reporting guideline for systematic reviews and meta-analyses of diagnostic accuracy studies: The PRISMA-DTA initiative. http://www.equator-network.org/ wp-content/uploads/2009/02/PRISMA-DTA-Executive-Summary.pdf (Accessed March 2017).
26. Leeflang MM, Rutjes AW, Reitsma JB, Hooft L, Bossuyt PM. Variation of a test's sensitivity and specificity with disease prevalence. CMAJ 2013;185:E537-44.
27. Whiting P, Rutjes AW, Reitsma JB, Bossuyt PM, Kleijnen J. The development of QUADAS: A tool for the quality assessment of studies of diagnostic accuracy included in systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol 2003;3:25.
28. Ochodo EA, van Enst WA, Naaktgeboren CA, de Groot JA, Hooft L, Moons KG, et al. Incorporating quality assessments of primary studies in the conclusions of diagnostic accuracy reviews: A cross-sectional study. BMC Med Res Methodol 2014;14:33.
29. Deeks J, Bossuyt P, Gatsonis C. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy. 1.0.0 ed: The Cochrane Collaboration, 2013.
30. McGrath TA, McInnes MD, Korevaar DA, Bossuyt PM. Meta-analyses of diagnostic accuracy in imaging journals: Analysis of pooling techniques and their effect on summary estimates of diagnostic accuracy. Radiology 2016;281:78 -85.
31. Group P. The PRISMA statement. http://www.prismastatement. org/ (Accessed November 2014).
32. Bossuyt PM, Reitsma JB, Linnet K, Moons KG. Beyond diagnostic accuracy: The clinical utility of diagnostic tests. Clin Chem 2012;58:1636 -43.