1
|
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. [PMID: 27164274 DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2016.04.012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 34] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/23/2015] [Revised: 02/26/2016] [Accepted: 04/29/2016] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To describe the impact of peer reviewers on spin in reports of nonrandomized studies assessing a therapeutic intervention. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING This is a systematic review and retrospective before-after study. The sample consists of primary reports (n = 128) published in BioMed Central Medical Series journals between January 1, 2011, and December 31, 2013. The main outcome measures are the following: number and type of spin examples identified, deleted, or added by peer reviewers in the whole manuscript; number of reports with spin in abstract conclusions not detected by peer reviewers; the level of spin (i.e., no, low, moderate, and high level of spin) in the abstract conclusions before and after the peer review. RESULTS For 70 (55%) submitted manuscripts, peer reviewers identified at least one example of spin. Of 123 unique examples of spin identified by peer reviewers, 82 (67%) were completely deleted by the authors. For 19 articles (15%), peer reviewers requested adding some spin, and for 11 (9%), the spin was added by the authors. Peer reviewers failed to identify spin in abstract conclusions of 97 (76%) reports. CONCLUSION Peer reviewers identified many examples of spin in submitted manuscripts. However, their influence on changing spin in the abstract conclusions was low.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Clément Lazarus
- INSERM, UMR 1153, Epidemiology and Biostatistics Sorbonne Paris Cité Center (CRESS), METHODS Team 1 place du Parvis Notre Dame 75004, Paris, France; Paris Descartes University, Sorbonne Paris Cité, Faculté de Médecine, 1 place du Parvis Notre Dame 75004, Paris, France; Centre d'Epidémiologie Clinique, AP-HP (Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris), 1 place du Parvis Notre Dame 75004, Paris, France
| | - Romana Haneef
- INSERM, UMR 1153, Epidemiology and Biostatistics Sorbonne Paris Cité Center (CRESS), METHODS Team 1 place du Parvis Notre Dame 75004, Paris, France; Paris Descartes University, Sorbonne Paris Cité, Faculté de Médecine, 1 place du Parvis Notre Dame 75004, Paris, France
| | - Philippe Ravaud
- INSERM, UMR 1153, Epidemiology and Biostatistics Sorbonne Paris Cité Center (CRESS), METHODS Team 1 place du Parvis Notre Dame 75004, Paris, France; Paris Descartes University, Sorbonne Paris Cité, Faculté de Médecine, 1 place du Parvis Notre Dame 75004, Paris, France; Centre d'Epidémiologie Clinique, AP-HP (Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris), 1 place du Parvis Notre Dame 75004, Paris, France; Department of Epidemiology, Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health, 22 W 168th Street, New York, NY 10032, USA
| | - Sally Hopewell
- Centre for Statistics in Medicine, Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Botnar Research Centre, Windmill Road, Oxford OX3 7LD, UK
| | - Douglas G Altman
- Centre for Statistics in Medicine, Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Botnar Research Centre, Windmill Road, Oxford OX3 7LD, UK
| | - Isabelle Boutron
- INSERM, UMR 1153, Epidemiology and Biostatistics Sorbonne Paris Cité Center (CRESS), METHODS Team 1 place du Parvis Notre Dame 75004, Paris, France; Paris Descartes University, Sorbonne Paris Cité, Faculté de Médecine, 1 place du Parvis Notre Dame 75004, Paris, France; Centre d'Epidémiologie Clinique, AP-HP (Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris), 1 place du Parvis Notre Dame 75004, Paris, France.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Messing K. Pain and Prejudice: Does Collecting Information From the Standpoint of Exposed Workers Improve Scientific Examination of Work-Related Musculoskeletal Disorders? INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HEALTH SERVICES 2015; 46:465-82. [PMID: 26272913 DOI: 10.1177/0020731415595337] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
The meaning, feasibility, and importance of scientific objectivity have been debated among public health scientists. The debate is particularly relevant to occupational health, because of frequent opposition between employer and worker interests. This article suggests that the concept of standpoint (J. Eakin) may be more useful than that of objectivity in framing discussion of work-related musculoskeletal disorders. Studies done from a "worker" standpoint can, for example, investigate and characterize environmental risk factors for work-related musculoskeletal disorders, while studies from an "employer" standpoint may concentrate on identifying individual workers likely to report work-related musculoskeletal disorders or those for whom consequences of work-related musculoskeletal disorders are more severe. Within "worker" standpoints, a distinction between "high-prestige worker" and "lower-prestige worker" standpoints can be identified in the current scientific debate about the health costs and benefits of prolonged standing vs prolonged sitting at work. Contact with workers, particularly lower-prestige workers, is critical to developing and sustaining a worker-based standpoint among researchers in occupational health. This contact can be facilitated by formal collaborations between universities and unions or other community groups.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Karen Messing
- CINBIOSE, Université du Québec à Montréal, Montréal, Quebec, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Yassi A, Lockhart K. Work-relatedness of low back pain in nursing personnel: a systematic review. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF OCCUPATIONAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH 2013; 19:223-44. [PMID: 23885775 DOI: 10.1179/2049396713y.0000000027] [Citation(s) in RCA: 81] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/31/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Although non-specific low back pain (LBP) is known to be multifactorial, studies from across the globe have documented their higher prevalence in nurses. This systematic review was conducted to ascertain whether this much-documented association constitutes a causal relationship, and whether there is a discernible threshold of exposures associated with this elevated risk. METHODS PRISMA guidelines were followed and standard critical appraisal tools were applied. The outcome of interest was non-specific LBP or back injury; exposure was "performing nursing duties." Applicable studies, published in English during 1980-2012, were identified through database searches, screened against preset inclusion/exclusion criteria. Ergonomic assessments of nursing tasks were included along with epidemiological studies. Bradford Hill considerations for causation were utilized as a framework for discussing findings. FINDINGS Of 987 studies identified, 89 qualified for inclusion, comprising 21 longitudinal, 36 cross-sectional analytic, 23 descriptive biomechanical/ergonomic, and 9 review studies. Overall studies showed that nursing activities conferred increased risk for, and were associated with back disorders regardless of nursing technique, personal characteristics, and non-work-related factors. Patient handling appears to confer the highest risk, but other nursing duties are also associated with elevated risk, and confound dose-response assessments related to patient handling alone. Associations were strong, consistent, temporally possible, plausible, coherent, and analogous to other exposure-outcomes, with risk estimates ranging from 1·2 to 5·5 depending on definitions. A threshold of nursing activities below which the risk of back disorders is not elevated has not been established. INTERPRETATION Notwithstanding the bio-psycho-social nature of LBP, and complexities of studying this area, sufficient evidence exists of a causal relationship between nursing tasks and back disorders to warrant new policies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Annalee Yassi
- The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | | |
Collapse
|
4
|
Lippel K. Preserving workers' dignity in workers' compensation systems: an international perspective. Am J Ind Med 2012; 55:519-36. [PMID: 22354856 DOI: 10.1002/ajim.22022] [Citation(s) in RCA: 55] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 01/23/2012] [Indexed: 11/07/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Workers' compensation systems are among the most generous disability insurance systems in North America, although they are also known to be potentially adversarial and may have iatrogenic effects on claimants. This article examines issues to be considered to ensure fair compensation provided in a way that respects the dignity of workers. METHODS An overview of the literature on characteristics and effects of workers' compensation systems is followed by an analysis based on classic legal methods, including those of comparative law, complemented with interview data to examine three models of disability compensation. RESULTS The first part of the article identifies cross cutting issues to be considered in the examination of the equity of compensation systems and the protection of the dignity of claimants. These include three underpinnings of workers' compensation: the links between a "no-fault" system and the adversarial process, the appropriate use of medical and scientific evidence in the determination of compensability and the application of appropriate measures for promoting return to work. The second part looks at accident compensation in New Zealand, where compensation is available regardless of the cause of the accident, and disability insurance in the Netherlands, where compensation is available regardless of the cause of the disability. It then describes a composite of characteristics favorable to equity drawn from the thirteen workers' compensation systems in Canada. CONCLUSION Systems that succeed in reducing opportunities for adversarial interactions and that provide substantive protection could better promote the dignity of claimants.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Katherine Lippel
- Canada Research Chair in Occupational Health and Safety Law, University of Ottawa, Faculty of Law, Civil Law Section, Ontario, Canada.
| |
Collapse
|