Selection in Reported Epidemiological Risks: An Empirical Assessment

Fotini K. Kavvoura · George Liberopoulos · John P. A. Ioannidis

115 citations0/0 files storedPLoS Medicine

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Meta-analysis and systematic reviews Academic Publishing and Open Access Statistical Methods in Epidemiology

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Epidemiological studies may be subject to selective reporting, but empirical evidence thereof is limited. We empirically evaluated the extent of selection of significant results and large effect sizes in a large sample of recent articles. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We evaluated 389 articles of epidemiological studies that reported, in their respective abstracts, at least one relative risk for a continuous risk factor in contrasts based on median, tertile, quartile, or quintile categorizations. We examined the proportion and correlates of reporting statistically significant and nonsignificant results in the abstract and whether the magnitude of the relative risks presented (coined to be consistently > or =1.00) differs depending on the type of contrast used for the risk factor. In 342 articles (87.9%), > or =1 statistically significant relative risk was reported in the abstract, while only 169 articles (43.4%) reported > or =1 statistically nonsignificant relative risk in the abstract. Reporting of statistically significant results was more common with structured abstracts, and was less common in US-based studies and in cancer outcomes. Among 50 randomly selected articles in which the full text was examined, a median of nine (interquartile range 5-16) statistically significant and six (interquartile range 3-16) statistically nonsignificant relative risks were presented (p = 0.25). Paradoxically, the smallest presented relative risks were based on the contrasts of extreme quintiles; on average, the relative risk magnitude was 1.41-, 1.42-, and 1.36-fold larger in contrasts of extreme quartiles, extreme tertiles, and above-versus-below median values, respectively (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Published epidemiological investigations almost universally highlight significant associations between risk factors and outcomes. For continuous risk factors, investigators selectively present contrasts between more extreme groups, when relative risks are inherently lower.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 115 citations exist upstream.

References

2007The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement: Guidelines for Reporting Observational Studies 2005Why Most Published Research Findings Are False 1999Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement 2001The Revised CONSORT Statement for Reporting Randomized Trials: Explanation and Elaboration 1991Publication bias in clinical research 2004Empirical Evidence for Selective Reporting of Outcomes in Randomized Trials 2005Contradicted and Initially Stronger Effects in Highly Cited Clinical Research 1997Language bias in randomised controlled trials published in English and German

Cited by

2013Grading the Strength of a Body of Evidence When Assessing Health Care Interventions for the Effective Health Care Program of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality: An Update 2007Why Most Published Research Findings Are False: Author's Reply to Goodman and Greenland 2009Synthesis of observational studies should consider credibility ceilings 2011Prognostic effect size of cardiovascular biomarkers in datasets from observational studies versus randomised trials: meta-epidemiology study

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.