Cargando…

Conflicts of interest and spin in reviews of psychological therapies: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE: To explore conflicts of interest (COI) and their reporting in systematic reviews of psychological therapies, and to evaluate spin in the conclusions of the reviews. METHODS: MEDLINE and PsycINFO databases were searched for systematic reviews published between 2010 and 2013 that assessed e...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Lieb, Klaus, von der Osten-Sacken, Jan, Stoffers-Winterling, Jutta, Reiss, Neele, Barth, Jürgen
Formato:	Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:	English
Publicado:	BMJ Publishing Group 2016
Materias:	Medical Publishing and Peer Review
Acceso en línea:	https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4853969/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27118287 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2015-010606

Ejemplares similares

Conflict-of-interest disclosure at medical journals in Japan: a nationwide survey of the practices of journal secretariats
por: Kojima, Takako, et al.
Publicado: (2015)

Authorship, plagiarism and conflict of interest: views and practices from low/middle-income country health researchers
por: Rohwer, Anke, et al.
Publicado: (2017)

Editors’ and authors’ individual conflicts of interest disclosure and journal transparency. A cross-sectional study of high-impact medical specialty journals
por: Dal-Ré, Rafael, et al.
Publicado: (2019)

Pharmacotherapy for Borderline Personality Disorder: an Update of Published, Unpublished and Ongoing Studies
por: Stoffers-Winterling, Jutta, et al.
Publicado: (2020)

Effect of different financial competing interest statements on readers’ perceptions of clinical educational articles: a randomised controlled trial
por: Schroter, Sara, et al.
Publicado: (2019)

Effect of different financial competing interest statements on readers' perceptions of clinical educational articles: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial
por: Schroter, Sara, et al.
Publicado: (2016)

Cross-sectional study of preprints and final journal publications from COVID-19 studies: discrepancies in results reporting and spin in interpretation
por: Bero, Lisa, et al.
Publicado: (2021)

A scoping review protocol on the roles and tasks of peer reviewers in the manuscript review process in biomedical journals
por: Glonti, Ketevan, et al.
Publicado: (2017)

Bias in dissemination of clinical research findings: structured OPEN framework of what, who and why, based on literature review and expert consensus
por: Bassler, Dirk, et al.
Publicado: (2016)

Influence of external peer reviewer scores for funding applications on funding board decisions: a retrospective analysis of 1561 reviews
por: Sorrell, Lexy, et al.
Publicado: (2018)

Guidance for reporting outcomes in clinical trials: scoping review protocol
por: Butcher, Nancy J, et al.
Publicado: (2019)

Help-seeking behaviours, opportunistic treatment and psychological implications of adolescent acne: cross-sectional studies in schools and hospital outpatient departments in the UK
por: Desai, Karishma Parimal, et al.
Publicado: (2017)

Perception of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement of authors publishing reviews in nursing journals: a cross-sectional online survey
por: Tam, Wilson W S, et al.
Publicado: (2019)

Systematic review on the primary and secondary reporting of the prevalence of ghostwriting in the medical literature
por: Stretton, Serina
Publicado: (2014)

Quality of descriptions of treatments: a review of published randomised controlled trials
por: Schroter, Sara, et al.
Publicado: (2012)

Scoping review on interventions to improve adherence to reporting guidelines in health research
por: Blanco, David, et al.
Publicado: (2019)

Using simplified peer review processes to fund research: a prospective study
por: Herbert, Danielle L, et al.
Publicado: (2015)

Interpretation of CIs in clinical trials with non-significant results: systematic review and recommendations
por: Gewandter, Jennifer S, et al.
Publicado: (2017)

Role of supplementary material in biomedical journal articles: surveys of authors, reviewers and readers
por: Price, Amy, et al.
Publicado: (2018)

Non-inferiority trials: are they inferior? A systematic review of reporting in major medical journals
por: Rehal, Sunita, et al.
Publicado: (2016)

Interventions to improve adherence to reporting guidelines in health research: a scoping review protocol
por: Blanco, David, et al.
Publicado: (2017)

Editors’ perspectives on the peer-review process in biomedical journals: protocol for a qualitative study
por: Glonti, Ketevan, et al.
Publicado: (2018)

Development of ARCADIA: a tool for assessing the quality of peer-review reports in biomedical research
por: Superchi, Cecilia, et al.
Publicado: (2020)

Quality of reporting of randomised controlled trials of artificial intelligence in healthcare: a systematic review
por: Shahzad, Rida, et al.
Publicado: (2022)

A retrospective analysis of the effect of discussion in teleconference and face-to-face scientific peer-review panels
por: Carpenter, Afton S, et al.
Publicado: (2015)

Journal editors’ perspectives on the roles and tasks of peer reviewers in biomedical journals: a qualitative study
por: Glonti, Ketevan, et al.
Publicado: (2019)

Training patients to review scientific reports for the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute: an observational study
por: Ivlev, Ilya, et al.
Publicado: (2019)

Minocycline for the treatment of mental health and neurological conditions: study protocol of a systematic review and meta-analysis
por: Bortolasci, Chiara C, et al.
Publicado: (2020)

Characteristics of scholars who review for predatory and legitimate journals: linkage study of Cabells Scholarly Analytics and Publons data
por: Severin, Anna, et al.
Publicado: (2021)

Reporting of data on participant ethnicity and socioeconomic status in high-impact medical journals: a targeted literature review
por: Buttery, Sara C, et al.
Publicado: (2022)

Supporting patient and public partners in writing lay summaries of scientific evidence in healthcare: a scoping review protocol
por: Zarshenas, Sareh, et al.
Publicado: (2022)

Reporting quality of randomised controlled trial abstracts among high-impact general medical journals: a review and analysis
por: Hays, Meredith, et al.
Publicado: (2016)

Gender disparity between authors in leading medical journals during the COVID-19 pandemic: a cross-sectional review
por: Misra, Vaidehi, et al.
Publicado: (2021)

Assessment of the extent of unpublished studies in prognostic factor research: a systematic review of p53 immunohistochemistry in bladder cancer as an example
por: Sekula, Peggy, et al.
Publicado: (2016)

Peer review comments on drug trials submitted to medical journals differ depending on sponsorship, results and acceptance: a retrospective cohort study
por: van Lent, Marlies, et al.
Publicado: (2015)

Cross-sectional study of the relationship between women’s representation among editors and peer reviewers in journals of the British Medical Journal Publishing Group
por: Pinho-Gomes, Ana-Catarina, et al.
Publicado: (2022)

Peer Reviewed Evaluation of Registered End-Points of Randomised Trials (the PRE-REPORT study): a stepped wedge, cluster-randomised trial
por: Jones, Christopher W, et al.
Publicado: (2022)

Haphazard reporting of deaths in clinical trials: a review of cases of ClinicalTrials.gov records and matched publications–a cross-sectional study
por: Earley, Amy, et al.
Publicado: (2013)

A protocol of a cross-sectional study evaluating an online tool for early career peer reviewers assessing reports of randomised controlled trials
por: Chauvin, Anthony, et al.
Publicado: (2017)

Peer reviewed evaluation of registered end-points of randomised trials (the PRE-REPORT study): protocol for a stepped-wedge, cluster-randomised trial
por: Jones, Christopher W, et al.
Publicado: (2019)

Cannot write session to /tmp/vufind_sessions/sess_qbvotnhj3ogbgf1ngbsg8q09jo