From: Methods for Evaluation of medical prediction Models, Tests And Biomarkers (MEMTAB) 2018 Symposium
Category of spin | Type of spin | Criteria | Spin frequency, n = 200 n (%) [95% CI] |
---|---|---|---|
Misrepresentation a. 1 | Incorrect presentation of results in the abstract or main text conclusion | Abstract conclusion OR main text conclusion for BM’s clinical performance is not in accordance with or is stronger than results justify. Actual spin if all the following: a. Exaggerating the performance of the BM in the conclusion despite low performance measures reported in the results; b. Claiming effect of the BM despite statistically non-significant results; c. Claiming effect despite not providing imprecision or statistical test (confidence interval or P values) between different biomarker models tested or patient groups (subgroups); | 40 (20% [15% - 26%]) Frequency in abstract conclusion: 14 (7% [4% - 12%]) Frequency in main text conclusion: 37 (18.5% [14% - 25%]) |
a. 2 | Mismatch between results reported in abstract and main text | Results reported in the abstract is not in accordance with results reported in main text. Actual spin if all the following: a. Results reported in the abstract contains statement in which statistical significance is claimed, despite not providing imprecision or test of significant (CI or p-values) in results reported in the main text; b. Selective reporting of statistically significant outcomes in the abstract compared to the results reported in the main text; c. Results reported in the abstract that do not match results provided in the main text; | 33 (16.5% [12% - 23%]) |
a. 3 | Mismatch between results reported and the title | The title contains wording misrepresenting BM’s clinical performance compared to results in the main text; | 11 (5.5% [3% - 10%]) |
Misinterpretation a. 4 | Other purposes of biomarker claimed not pre-specified and/or investigated | Abstract conclusion OR main text conclusion contains statement suggesting BM purposes not pre-specified and/or investigated. | Total: 65 (32.5% [26% - 40%]) Frequency in abstract conclusion: 36 (20.5% [13% - 24%]) Frequency in main text conclusion: 60 (30% [24% - 37%]) |
a. 5 | Mismatch between intended aim and abstract or main text conclusion | Abstract conclusion OR main text conclusion for BM’s clinical performance is stronger than study design. Actual spin if all the following: a. The main text conclusion contains statement in which BM utility is claimed despite not evaluating clinical effectiveness (i.e. useful); b. The main text conclusion contains statement in which BM performance improvement is claimed despite not evaluating incremental measures (i.e. improve); c. The main text conclusion contains statement that uses causal language for BM(s) being assessed despite the use of a nonrandomized design; | Total: 57 (28.5% [23% - 35%]) Frequency in abstract conclusion: 41 (20.5% [15% - 27%]) Frequency in main text conclusion: 31 (15.5% [11% - 21%]) |
a. 6 | Other benefits of BM claimed not pre-specified and/or investigated | The main text conclusion contains statement claiming BM benefits not pre-specified and/or investigated. | 10 (5% [3% - 9%]) |
a. 7 | Extrapolation from study participants to a larger or a different population | The main text conclusion contains statement that extrapolates BM’s clinical performance to a larger or a different population, not supported by recruited subjects. | 10 (5% [3% - 9%]) |