Cargando…

The over-representation of significant p values in abstracts compared to corresponding full texts: A systematic review of surgical randomized trials

BACKGROUND: Abstracts are often the only read summaries of research findings, and it is essential that they accurately represent of the contents of the full text of the randomised control trial (RCT). We investigated whether outcomes in surgical trials were selectively reported in abstracts based on...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Assem, Yusuf, Adie, Sam, Tang, Jason, Harris, Ian A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5898552/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29696186
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conctc.2017.07.007
_version_ 1783314145968390144
author Assem, Yusuf
Adie, Sam
Tang, Jason
Harris, Ian A.
author_facet Assem, Yusuf
Adie, Sam
Tang, Jason
Harris, Ian A.
author_sort Assem, Yusuf
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Abstracts are often the only read summaries of research findings, and it is essential that they accurately represent of the contents of the full text of the randomised control trial (RCT). We investigated whether outcomes in surgical trials were selectively reported in abstracts based on their statistical significance. OBJECTIVE: To compare the proportion of significant p-values reported in abstracts to their corresponding full texts in surgical RCTs. METHOD: A Meta-analysis of 350 full text RCTs conducted on humans that compared a surgical intervention to any other intervention. An electronic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) was conducted. All outcomes were extracted from the abstract and the full text. Frequency histograms were used to plot the distribution of numerically reported p-values across the statistical significance spectrum. For each RCT, a 2 × 2 table was populated with that trial's outcomes and whether the outcome was statistically significant (p < 0.05). From each 2 × 2 table, an odds ratio (OR) was calculated describing the association between statistical significance, and reporting in the abstract. ORs were pooled in random effects meta-analysis for an overall estimate of the association. RESULTS: A total of 8258 reported outcomes were included. Outcomes reported in a surgical RCT abstract had three times the odds of being significant when compared to the corresponding full text (OR = 3.0, 95% confidence interval 2.5–3.6, p < 0.001). This finding was consistent and not subject to heterogeneity (I(2) = 0%). Both histograms demonstrated a large drop in the frequency of reported p values between 0.04 and 0.05, and after the 0.06 thresholds. CONCLUSIONS: Data presented in abstracts is biased to statistically significant outcomes. Clinicians and policy makers should do not rely solely on information presented in abstracts for their decision-making.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5898552
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-58985522018-04-25 The over-representation of significant p values in abstracts compared to corresponding full texts: A systematic review of surgical randomized trials Assem, Yusuf Adie, Sam Tang, Jason Harris, Ian A. Contemp Clin Trials Commun Article BACKGROUND: Abstracts are often the only read summaries of research findings, and it is essential that they accurately represent of the contents of the full text of the randomised control trial (RCT). We investigated whether outcomes in surgical trials were selectively reported in abstracts based on their statistical significance. OBJECTIVE: To compare the proportion of significant p-values reported in abstracts to their corresponding full texts in surgical RCTs. METHOD: A Meta-analysis of 350 full text RCTs conducted on humans that compared a surgical intervention to any other intervention. An electronic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) was conducted. All outcomes were extracted from the abstract and the full text. Frequency histograms were used to plot the distribution of numerically reported p-values across the statistical significance spectrum. For each RCT, a 2 × 2 table was populated with that trial's outcomes and whether the outcome was statistically significant (p < 0.05). From each 2 × 2 table, an odds ratio (OR) was calculated describing the association between statistical significance, and reporting in the abstract. ORs were pooled in random effects meta-analysis for an overall estimate of the association. RESULTS: A total of 8258 reported outcomes were included. Outcomes reported in a surgical RCT abstract had three times the odds of being significant when compared to the corresponding full text (OR = 3.0, 95% confidence interval 2.5–3.6, p < 0.001). This finding was consistent and not subject to heterogeneity (I(2) = 0%). Both histograms demonstrated a large drop in the frequency of reported p values between 0.04 and 0.05, and after the 0.06 thresholds. CONCLUSIONS: Data presented in abstracts is biased to statistically significant outcomes. Clinicians and policy makers should do not rely solely on information presented in abstracts for their decision-making. Elsevier 2017-07-28 /pmc/articles/PMC5898552/ /pubmed/29696186 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conctc.2017.07.007 Text en Crown Copyright © 2017 Published by Elsevier Inc. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Assem, Yusuf
Adie, Sam
Tang, Jason
Harris, Ian A.
The over-representation of significant p values in abstracts compared to corresponding full texts: A systematic review of surgical randomized trials
title The over-representation of significant p values in abstracts compared to corresponding full texts: A systematic review of surgical randomized trials
title_full The over-representation of significant p values in abstracts compared to corresponding full texts: A systematic review of surgical randomized trials
title_fullStr The over-representation of significant p values in abstracts compared to corresponding full texts: A systematic review of surgical randomized trials
title_full_unstemmed The over-representation of significant p values in abstracts compared to corresponding full texts: A systematic review of surgical randomized trials
title_short The over-representation of significant p values in abstracts compared to corresponding full texts: A systematic review of surgical randomized trials
title_sort over-representation of significant p values in abstracts compared to corresponding full texts: a systematic review of surgical randomized trials
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5898552/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29696186
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conctc.2017.07.007
work_keys_str_mv AT assemyusuf theoverrepresentationofsignificantpvaluesinabstractscomparedtocorrespondingfulltextsasystematicreviewofsurgicalrandomizedtrials
AT adiesam theoverrepresentationofsignificantpvaluesinabstractscomparedtocorrespondingfulltextsasystematicreviewofsurgicalrandomizedtrials
AT tangjason theoverrepresentationofsignificantpvaluesinabstractscomparedtocorrespondingfulltextsasystematicreviewofsurgicalrandomizedtrials
AT harrisiana theoverrepresentationofsignificantpvaluesinabstractscomparedtocorrespondingfulltextsasystematicreviewofsurgicalrandomizedtrials
AT assemyusuf overrepresentationofsignificantpvaluesinabstractscomparedtocorrespondingfulltextsasystematicreviewofsurgicalrandomizedtrials
AT adiesam overrepresentationofsignificantpvaluesinabstractscomparedtocorrespondingfulltextsasystematicreviewofsurgicalrandomizedtrials
AT tangjason overrepresentationofsignificantpvaluesinabstractscomparedtocorrespondingfulltextsasystematicreviewofsurgicalrandomizedtrials
AT harrisiana overrepresentationofsignificantpvaluesinabstractscomparedtocorrespondingfulltextsasystematicreviewofsurgicalrandomizedtrials