Cargando…

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

OBJECTIVES: The source of research may influence one's interpretation of it in either negative or positive ways, however, there are no robust experiments to determine how source impacts on one's judgment of the research article. We determine the impact of source on respondents’ assessment...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Harris, M, Macinko, J, Jimenez, G, Mahfoud, M, Anderson, C
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4710821/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26719313
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2015-008993
_version_ 1782409864044085248
author Harris, M
Macinko, J
Jimenez, G
Mahfoud, M
Anderson, C
author_facet Harris, M
Macinko, J
Jimenez, G
Mahfoud, M
Anderson, C
author_sort Harris, M
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: The source of research may influence one's interpretation of it in either negative or positive ways, however, there are no robust experiments to determine how source impacts on one's judgment of the research article. We determine the impact of source on respondents’ assessment of the quality and relevance of selected research abstracts. DESIGN: Web-based survey design using four healthcare research abstracts previously published and included in Cochrane Reviews. SETTING: All Council on the Education of Public Health-accredited Schools and Programmes of Public Health in the USA. PARTICIPANTS: 899 core faculty members (full, associate and assistant professors) INTERVENTION: Each of the four abstracts appeared with a high-income source half of the time, and low-income source half of the time. Participants each reviewed the same four abstracts, but were randomly allocated to receive two abstracts with high-income source, and two abstracts with low-income source, allowing for within-abstract comparison of quality and relevance PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Within-abstract comparison of participants’ rating scores on two measures—strength of the evidence, and likelihood of referral to a peer (1–10 rating scale). OR was calculated using a generalised ordered logit model adjusting for sociodemographic covariates. RESULTS: Participants who received high income country source abstracts were equal in all known characteristics to the participants who received the abstracts with low income country sources. For one of the four abstracts (a randomised, controlled trial of a pharmaceutical intervention), likelihood of referral to a peer was greater if the source was a high income country (OR 1.28, 1.02 to 1.62, p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: All things being equal, in one of the four abstracts, the respondents were influenced by a high-income source in their rating of research abstracts. More research may be needed to explore how the origin of a research article may lead to stereotype activation and application in research evaluation.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4710821
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-47108212016-01-28 Does a research article's country of origin affect perception of its quality and relevance? A national trial of US public health researchers Harris, M Macinko, J Jimenez, G Mahfoud, M Anderson, C BMJ Open Medical Publishing and Peer Review OBJECTIVES: The source of research may influence one's interpretation of it in either negative or positive ways, however, there are no robust experiments to determine how source impacts on one's judgment of the research article. We determine the impact of source on respondents’ assessment of the quality and relevance of selected research abstracts. DESIGN: Web-based survey design using four healthcare research abstracts previously published and included in Cochrane Reviews. SETTING: All Council on the Education of Public Health-accredited Schools and Programmes of Public Health in the USA. PARTICIPANTS: 899 core faculty members (full, associate and assistant professors) INTERVENTION: Each of the four abstracts appeared with a high-income source half of the time, and low-income source half of the time. Participants each reviewed the same four abstracts, but were randomly allocated to receive two abstracts with high-income source, and two abstracts with low-income source, allowing for within-abstract comparison of quality and relevance PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Within-abstract comparison of participants’ rating scores on two measures—strength of the evidence, and likelihood of referral to a peer (1–10 rating scale). OR was calculated using a generalised ordered logit model adjusting for sociodemographic covariates. RESULTS: Participants who received high income country source abstracts were equal in all known characteristics to the participants who received the abstracts with low income country sources. For one of the four abstracts (a randomised, controlled trial of a pharmaceutical intervention), likelihood of referral to a peer was greater if the source was a high income country (OR 1.28, 1.02 to 1.62, p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: All things being equal, in one of the four abstracts, the respondents were influenced by a high-income source in their rating of research abstracts. More research may be needed to explore how the origin of a research article may lead to stereotype activation and application in research evaluation. BMJ Publishing Group 2015-12-30 /pmc/articles/PMC4710821/ /pubmed/26719313 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2015-008993 Text en Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/ This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
spellingShingle Medical Publishing and Peer Review
Harris, M
Macinko, J
Jimenez, G
Mahfoud, M
Anderson, C
Does a research article's country of origin affect perception of its quality and relevance? A national trial of US public health researchers
title Does a research article's country of origin affect perception of its quality and relevance? A national trial of US public health researchers
title_full Does a research article's country of origin affect perception of its quality and relevance? A national trial of US public health researchers
title_fullStr Does a research article's country of origin affect perception of its quality and relevance? A national trial of US public health researchers
title_full_unstemmed Does a research article's country of origin affect perception of its quality and relevance? A national trial of US public health researchers
title_short Does a research article's country of origin affect perception of its quality and relevance? A national trial of US public health researchers
title_sort does a research article's country of origin affect perception of its quality and relevance? a national trial of us public health researchers
topic Medical Publishing and Peer Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4710821/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26719313
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2015-008993
work_keys_str_mv AT harrism doesaresearcharticlescountryoforiginaffectperceptionofitsqualityandrelevanceanationaltrialofuspublichealthresearchers
AT macinkoj doesaresearcharticlescountryoforiginaffectperceptionofitsqualityandrelevanceanationaltrialofuspublichealthresearchers
AT jimenezg doesaresearcharticlescountryoforiginaffectperceptionofitsqualityandrelevanceanationaltrialofuspublichealthresearchers
AT mahfoudm doesaresearcharticlescountryoforiginaffectperceptionofitsqualityandrelevanceanationaltrialofuspublichealthresearchers
AT andersonc doesaresearcharticlescountryoforiginaffectperceptionofitsqualityandrelevanceanationaltrialofuspublichealthresearchers