Document Type

Article

Publication Title

Cureus

Abstract

In scientific reporting, ‘spin’ refers to presenting neutral or negative outcomes in a manner that infers favorable results. Spin can be especially problematic in the abstracts of randomized control trials, leading to an incorrect interpretation of trial outcomes, and potentially impacting subsequent studies, patient care, and policy decisions. The present study aims to evaluate the presence of spin in the abstracts of registered randomized control trials published in allergy and immunology journals. A systematic search of the PubMed database was performed to identify randomized controlled trials of human subjects registered in a clinical trial registry with a test and control group and a nonsignificant primary endpoint. A total of 1,248 articles were screened and 66 abstracts met full inclusion criteria. Thirty-five of the 66 (53%) abstracts were found to contain one or more elements of spin, among which 11 (31.4%) had spin in the title, 29 (82.9%) in the abstract results, and 30 (85.7%) in the abstract conclusion. Industry-sponsored trials did not contain more spin compared to other funding sources (p=0.62). High rates of spin may adversely affect the interpretation and integration of new research. Careful evaluation is recommended when reviewing abstracts lacking statistically significant primary outcomes.

DOI

10.7759/cureus.84840

Publication Date

5-26-2025

Keywords

allergy, immunology, outcome reporting bias, randomized control trials, RCT, spin

ISSN

2168-8184

Download

Share

COinS