Trial Outcomes & Findings for Impact of "Spin" on the Interpretation of Results of Randomized Trials in the Field of Cancer (NCT NCT01848704)
NCT ID: NCT01848704
Last Updated: 2024-04-26
Results Overview
The primary endpoint was the interpretation of abstract results by the participants. All readers participating in the study evaluated the abstracts of randomized trials and answered the following questions: based on this abstract, do you think treatment A would be beneficial to patients? (answer: numerical scale from 0 not at all likely tp 10 very likely)
Recruitment status
COMPLETED
Study phase
NA
Target enrollment
300 participants
Primary outcome timeframe
1 month
Results posted on
2024-04-26
Participant Flow
Participant milestones
| Measure |
Abstract With Spin
30 abstracts of 2 parallel arms negative RCTs (ie, non-statistically significant primary outcome) evaluating treatment in the field of cancer and having spin in the abstract conclusion according to a classification developed previously
interpretation of the abstract
|
Abstract Without Spin
The 30 abstracts with spin were systematically rewritten without spin
interpretation of the abstract
|
|---|---|---|
|
Overall Study
STARTED
|
150
|
150
|
|
Overall Study
COMPLETED
|
150
|
150
|
|
Overall Study
NOT COMPLETED
|
0
|
0
|
Reasons for withdrawal
Withdrawal data not reported
Baseline Characteristics
Impact of "Spin" on the Interpretation of Results of Randomized Trials in the Field of Cancer
Baseline characteristics by cohort
| Measure |
Abstract With Spin
n=150 Participants
30 abstracts of 2 parallel arms negative RCTs (ie, non-statistically significant primary outcome) evaluating treatment in the field of cancer and having spin in the abstract conclusion according to a classification developed previously
interpretation of the abstract
|
Abstract Without Spin
n=150 Participants
The abstracts with spin were systematically rewritten without spin
interpretation of the abstract
|
Total
n=300 Participants
Total of all reporting groups
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Age, Continuous
|
47.0 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 9.7 • n=99 Participants
|
48.3 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 9.9 • n=107 Participants
|
47.7 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 9.8 • n=206 Participants
|
|
Sex: Female, Male
Female
|
26 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
39 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
65 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
|
Sex: Female, Male
Male
|
124 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
111 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
235 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
|
Graduate degree
MD
|
73 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
82 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
155 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
|
Graduate degree
MD/PhD
|
71 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
62 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
133 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
|
Graduate degree
Other
|
6 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
6 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
12 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
|
Location
Europe
|
84 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
85 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
169 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
|
Location
United States
|
34 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
43 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
77 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
|
Location
Canada
|
12 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
8 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
20 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
|
Location
South America
|
6 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
6 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
|
Location
Asia
|
6 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
10 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
16 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
|
Location
Oceania
|
8 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
4 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
12 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
|
Duration of practice, years
<5
|
6 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
8 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
14 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
|
Duration of practice, years
5-15
|
63 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
58 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
121 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
|
Duration of practice, years
>15
|
81 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
84 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
165 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
|
Current practice
Primary care center
|
25 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
35 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
60 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
|
Current practice
Secondary care center
|
15 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
9 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
24 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
|
Current practice
Tertiary care center
|
110 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
106 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
216 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
|
No. of randomized trials involved in
< 3 trials
|
35 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
36 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
71 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
|
No. of randomized trials involved in
4 to 10 trials
|
39 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
43 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
82 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
|
No. of randomized trials involved in
> 10 trials
|
76 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
71 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
147 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
|
No. of randomized trials published as a corresponding
< 3
|
96 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
89 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
185 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
|
No. of randomized trials published as a corresponding
4 to 10
|
37 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
39 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
76 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
|
No. of randomized trials published as a corresponding
> 10
|
17 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
22 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
39 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
|
No. of abstracts of randomized trials read in the last month
<5
|
22 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
24 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
46 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
|
No. of abstracts of randomized trials read in the last month
5 to 10
|
51 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
48 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
99 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
|
No. of abstracts of randomized trials read in the last month
10 to 15
|
31 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
31 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
62 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
|
No. of abstracts of randomized trials read in the last month
>15
|
46 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
47 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
93 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
|
No. of articles peer reviewed in the last year
<5
|
47 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
53 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
100 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
|
No. of articles peer reviewed in the last year
5 to 10
|
48 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
50 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
98 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
|
No. of articles peer reviewed in the last year
> 10
|
55 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
47 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
102 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
|
No. of grant proposals peer reviewed in the last year
<5
|
110 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
112 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
222 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
|
No. of grant proposals peer reviewed in the last year
5 to 10
|
20 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
21 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
41 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
|
No. of grant proposals peer reviewed in the last year
> 10
|
20 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
17 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
37 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
|
Some training in epidemiology
|
73 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
69 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
142 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
|
Some training in the methods of randomized trials
|
114 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
121 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
235 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: 1 monthThe primary endpoint was the interpretation of abstract results by the participants. All readers participating in the study evaluated the abstracts of randomized trials and answered the following questions: based on this abstract, do you think treatment A would be beneficial to patients? (answer: numerical scale from 0 not at all likely tp 10 very likely)
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Abstract With Spin
n=150 Participants
30 abstracts of 2 parallel arms negative RCTs (ie, non-statistically significant primary outcome) evaluating treatment in the field of cancer and having spin in the abstract conclusion according to a classification developed previously
interpretation of the abstract
|
Abstract Without Spin
n=150 Participants
The abstracts with spin were systematically rewritten without spin
interpretation of the abstract
|
|---|---|---|
|
Interpretation of the Beneficial Effect of the Experimental Treatment
|
3.6 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.5
|
2.9 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.6
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: 1 monthFor each abstract, the participants answered the following: * Rate the overall rigor of the study methodology(scale 0-10) * Rate the importance of the study (scale 0-10) * Are you interested in reading the full text article for the study described in this abstract? (scale 0-10) * Do you think it would be interesting to run another trial evaluating this treatment? (scale 0-10) (Numerical scale from 0 not at all likely tp 10 very likely)
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Abstract With Spin
n=150 Participants
30 abstracts of 2 parallel arms negative RCTs (ie, non-statistically significant primary outcome) evaluating treatment in the field of cancer and having spin in the abstract conclusion according to a classification developed previously
interpretation of the abstract
|
Abstract Without Spin
n=150 Participants
The abstracts with spin were systematically rewritten without spin
interpretation of the abstract
|
|---|---|---|
|
Overall Rigor of the Study Methodology
|
4.5 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.4
|
5.1 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.5
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: 1 monthFor each abstract, the participants answered the following: •Rate the importance of the study (scale from 0 not at all likely tp 10 very likely)
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Abstract With Spin
n=150 Participants
30 abstracts of 2 parallel arms negative RCTs (ie, non-statistically significant primary outcome) evaluating treatment in the field of cancer and having spin in the abstract conclusion according to a classification developed previously
interpretation of the abstract
|
Abstract Without Spin
n=150 Participants
The abstracts with spin were systematically rewritten without spin
interpretation of the abstract
|
|---|---|---|
|
Importance of the Study
|
4.6 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.4
|
4.9 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.4
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: 1 monthFor each abstract, the participants answered the following: •Are you interested in reading the full text article for the study described in this abstract? (scale from 0 not at all likely tp 10 very likely)
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Abstract With Spin
n=150 Participants
30 abstracts of 2 parallel arms negative RCTs (ie, non-statistically significant primary outcome) evaluating treatment in the field of cancer and having spin in the abstract conclusion according to a classification developed previously
interpretation of the abstract
|
Abstract Without Spin
n=150 Participants
The abstracts with spin were systematically rewritten without spin
interpretation of the abstract
|
|---|---|---|
|
Interest in Reading Full Text
|
5.1 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 3.2
|
4.3 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 3.0
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: 1 monthFor each abstract, the participants answered the following: •do you think it would be interesting to run another trial evaluating this treatment? (scale 0-10) (answer: numerical scale from 0 not at all likely tp 10 very likely
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Abstract With Spin
n=150 Participants
30 abstracts of 2 parallel arms negative RCTs (ie, non-statistically significant primary outcome) evaluating treatment in the field of cancer and having spin in the abstract conclusion according to a classification developed previously
interpretation of the abstract
|
Abstract Without Spin
n=150 Participants
The abstracts with spin were systematically rewritten without spin
interpretation of the abstract
|
|---|---|---|
|
Need for More Evidence (Run a New Trial)
|
4.8 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.9
|
4.2 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.9
|
Adverse Events
Abstract With Spin
Serious events: 0 serious events
Other events: 0 other events
Deaths: 0 deaths
Abstract Without Spin
Serious events: 0 serious events
Other events: 0 other events
Deaths: 0 deaths
Serious adverse events
Adverse event data not reported
Other adverse events
Adverse event data not reported
Additional Information
Isabelle Boutron
Assistance publique hopitaux de paris
Phone: +33 1 42 34 78 33
Email: [email protected]
Results disclosure agreements
- Principal investigator is a sponsor employee
- Publication restrictions are in place