ReviewInternational journal of clinical pediatric dentistry2024
Evaluation of Spin in Abstracts of Randomized Controlled Trials Published in Pediatric Dentistry Journals.
Review in International journal of clinical pediatric dentistry, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Ninety-Seven Percent of Trials Investigating Robotic Interventions in Physiotherapy Contained Abstract Spin: A Meta-Research Review.Cochrane evidence synthesis and methods · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim and background: The term "spin" in biomedical journals refers to reporting strategies that misinterpret actual results and mislead readers toward viewing a drug or treatment in a more favorable or less favorable manner. The study aimed to evaluate the presence of spin in abstracts of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in PubMed-indexed pediatric dentistry journals. Methods: The study was conducted in the Department of Dentistry at a tertiary care hospital from April to June 2023. Randomized controlled trials published in PubMed-indexed pediatric dentistry journals from January 2010 to December 2022 were included. A literature search was performed by two independent reviewers according to predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. The abstracts of the included articles were evaluated to identify spin. The method described by Boutron et al. was followed to define and identify spin. Data summary statistics of the included studies were calculated using Google Sheets. Results: The initial search in PubMed resulted in 3,566 articles. According to the eligibility criteria, 327 articles were included and analyzed for spin in the abstracts. A total of 10 out of 327 (3%) articles showed spin in the abstracts. Randomized controlled trials evaluating pulpotomy as an intervention exhibited the most spin. The majority of abstracts with spin showed a discrepancy in the presentation of results and the conclusion section. Conclusion: The presence of spin is evident in 3% of PubMed-indexed Pediatric Dentistry journals published from 2010 to 2022. Clinical significance: Clinicians should be careful when implying the observations of abstracts of RCTs to the clinical scenario, considering the presence of spin. How to cite this article: Patnana AK, Jayam C, Kumar N,
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.