A randomized trial of an editorial intervention to reduce spin in the abstract's conclusion of manuscripts showed no significant effect

Objective: To estimate the effect of an intervention compared to the usual peer-review process on reducing spin in the abstract's conclusion of biomedical study reports. Study Design and Setting: We conducted a two-arm, parallel-group RCT in a sample of primary research manuscripts submitted to BMJ Open. The authors received short instructions alongside the peer reviewers' comments in the intervention group. We assessed the presence of spin (primary outcome), types of spin, and wording change in the revised abstract's conclusion. Outcome assessors were blinded to the intervention assignment. Results: Of the 184 manuscripts randomized, 108 (54 intervention, 54 control) were selected for revision and could be evaluated for the presence of spin. The proportion of manuscripts with spin was 6% lower (95% CI: 24% lower to 13% higher) in the intervention group (57%, 31/54) than in the control group (63%, 34/54). The wording of the revised abstract's conclusion was changed in 34/54 (63%) manuscripts in the intervention group and 26/54 (48%) in the control group. The four prespecified types of spin involved (i) selective reporting (12 in the intervention group vs. 8 in the control group), (ii) including information not supported by evidence (9 vs. 9), and (iii) interpretation not consistent with the study results (14 vs. 18), and (iv) unjustified recommendations for practice (5 vs. 11). Conclusion: These short instructions to authors did not have a statistically significant effect on reducing spin in revised abstract conclusions, and based on the confidence interval, the existence of a large effect can be excluded. Other interventions to reduce spin in reports of original research should be evaluated. Study registration: osf.io/xnuyt. (C) 2020 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Automated summary

The study aimed to estimate the effect of an intervention compared to usual peer-review process on reducing spin in abstract conclusions of biomedical study reports. Results showed that the short instructions to authors did not significantly reduce spin, suggesting the need for evaluation of other interventions to reduce spin in research reports.