The Library
The effect of journal impact factor, reporting conflicts, and reporting funding sources, on standardized effect sizes in back pain trials : a systematic review and meta-regression
Tools
Tools
Tools
Froud, Robert, Bjørkli, Tom, Bright, Philip, Rajendran, Dévan, Buchbinder, Rachelle, Underwood, Martin, Evans, David and Eldridge, Sandra (2015) The effect of journal impact factor, reporting conflicts, and reporting funding sources, on standardized effect sizes in back pain trials : a systematic review and meta-regression. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, 16 (1). doi:10.1186/s12891-015-0825-6
Research output not available from this repository.
Request-a-Copy directly from author or use local Library Get it For Me service.
Official URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-015-0825-6
Abstract
Background: Low back pain is a common and costly health complaint for which there are several moderately effective treatments. In some fields there is evidence that funder and financial conflicts are associated with trial outcomes. It is not clear whether effect sizes in back pain trials relate to journal impact factor, reporting conflicts of interest, or reporting funding. Methods: We performed a systematic review of English-language papers reporting randomised controlled trials of treatments for non-specific low back pain, published between 2006-2012. We modelled the relationship using 5-year journal impact factor, and categories of reported of conflicts of interest, and categories of reported funding (reported none and reported some, compared to not reporting these) using meta-regression, adjusting for sample size, and publication year. We also considered whether impact factor could be predicted by the direction of outcome, or trial sample size. Results: We could abstract data to calculate effect size in 99 of 146 trials that met our inclusion criteria. Effect size is not associated with impact factor, reporting of funding source, or reporting of conflicts of interest. However, explicitly reporting 'no trial funding' is strongly associated with larger absolute values of effect size (adjusted β=1.02 (95 % CI 0.44 to 1.59), P=0.001). Impact factor increases by 0.008 (0.004 to 0.012) per unit increase in trial sample size (P<0.001), but does not differ by reported direction of the LBP trial outcome (P=0.270). Conclusions: The absence of associations between effect size and impact factor, reporting sources of funding, and conflicts of interest reflects positively on research and publisher conduct in the field. Strong evidence of a large association between absolute magnitude of effect size and explicit reporting of 'no funding' suggests authors of unfunded trials are likely to report larger effect sizes, notwithstanding direction. This could relate in part to quality, resources, and/or how pragmatic a trial is. © 2015 Froud et al.
| Item Type: | Journal Article | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Subjects: | R Medicine > R Medicine (General) | ||||
| Divisions: | Faculty of Science, Engineering and Medicine > Medicine > Warwick Medical School > Clinical Trials Unit Faculty of Science, Engineering and Medicine > Medicine > Warwick Medical School > Health Sciences Faculty of Science, Engineering and Medicine > Medicine > Warwick Medical School |
||||
| Journal or Publication Title: | BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders | ||||
| Publisher: | Biomed central | ||||
| ISSN: | 1471-2474 | ||||
| Official Date: | 20 November 2015 | ||||
| Dates: |
|
||||
| Volume: | 16 | ||||
| Number: | 1 | ||||
| DOI: | 10.1186/s12891-015-0825-6 | ||||
| Status: | Not Peer Reviewed | ||||
| Publication Status: | Published | ||||
| Access rights to Published version: | Restricted or Subscription Access |
Request changes or add full text files to a record
Repository staff actions (login required)
 |
View Item |
