Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 2 Cohort A: prevalence and type of spin by main text by section

From: “Spin” in wound care research: the reporting and interpretation of randomized controlled trials with statistically non-significant primary outcome results or unspecified primary outcomes

  Dichotomous outcomes Continuous outcomes All studies
  Number (%) Number (%) Number (%)
  n = 13 n = 15 n = 28
Results – any type* 4 (30.8) 4 (26.7) 8 (28.6)
Focus on statistically significant results from:       
Within-group analyses 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0)
Subgroups 4 (30.8) 3 (20.0) 7 (25.0)
Secondary outcomes 0 (0.0) 3 (20.0) 3 (10.7)
Per protocol analysis 2 (15.4) 1 (6.7) 3 (10.7)
Other 1 (7.7) 0 (0.0) 1 (3.6)
Discussion – any type 8 (61.5) 8 (53.3) 16 (57.1)
Focus on statistically significant results from:       
Within-group analyses 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0)
Subgroups 4 (30.8) 4 (26.7) 8 (28.6)
Secondary outcomes 0 (0.0) 5 (33.3) 5 (17.9)
Per protocol analysis 2 (15.4) 1 (6.7) 3 (10.7)
Claims equivalence 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0)
Rules out adverse effect 1 (7.7) 5 (33.3) 6 (21.4)
Other 5 (38.5) 0 (0.0) 5 (17.9)
Conclusions – any type 7 (53.8) 10 (66.6) 17 (60.7)
Claims effectiveness with no acknowledgement of NS results for primary outcome 4 (30.8) 4 (26.7) 8 (28.6)
Claims equivalence 1 (7.7) 5 (33.3) 6 (21.4)
Rules out adverse effect 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0)
Acknowledges non-significance, but emphasizes significant results for other outcomes 3 (23.1) 4 (26.7) 7 (25.0)
Acknowledges non-significance, but emphasizes treatment benefit 2 (15.4) 3 (20.0) 5 (17.9)
Emphasizes benefit based on new outcome 1 (7.7) 3 (20.0 4 (14.3)
Other 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 2 (7.1)
  1. *More than one type could be used in each section of a report. NS, non-significant.