Analysis of Spin in the Reporting of Studies on Electroanalgesia for Musculoskeletal Pain.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to analyze the quality of reporting and presence of spin in abstracts of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) on the use of electroanalgesia for musculoskeletal pain. METHODS: The Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) was searched from 2010 to June 2021. Inclusion criteria were RCTs using electroanalgesia in individuals with musculoskeletal pain, written in any language, comparing 2 or more groups, and with pain as 1 of the outcomes. Two blinded, independent, and calibrated evaluators (Gwet's AC1 agreement analysis) performed eligibility and data extraction. General characteristics, report of outcomes, quality of reporting (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials for Abstracts [CONSORT-A]), and spin analysis (7-item spin checklist and spin analysis per section) were extracted from abstracts. RESULTS: Of 989 studies selected, 173 abstracts were analyzed after screening and eligibility criteria. Mean risk of bias on the PEDro scale was 6.02 ± 1.6 points. Most abstracts did not report significant differences for primary (51.4%) and secondary (63%) outcomes. Mean quality of reporting was 5.10 ± 2.4 points in the CONSORT-A, and spin was 2.97 ± 1.7. Abstracts had at least 1 type of spin (93%), and the conclusion presented the greatest number of spin types. More than 50% of abstracts recommended an intervention without significant differences between groups. CONCLUSION: This study found that the majority of RCT abstracts on electroanalgesia for musculoskeletal conditions in our sample had a moderate to high risk of bias, incomplete or missing information, and some type of spin. We recommend that health care providers who use electroanalgesia and the scientific community be aware of spin in published studies.

Testing zimbardo time perspective inventory in a brazilian sample / Testando lo inventario de la perspectiva temporal de zimbardo en una muestra brasileña

This paper examines the construct and discriminant validity of the Zimbardo Time Perspective Inventory (ZTPI) in a sample of 247 undergraduate Brazilian students. The ZTPI five-factor structure, comprised by Past-Negative, Present-Hedonistic, Future, Past-Positive and Present-Fatalistic, provided acceptable fit to the data, and was statistically better fitting than competing models. Present-Hedonistic correlated positively with alcohol consumption and negatively with religiosity, Future correlated positively with health concern, and negatively with alcohol consumption, and Past-Positive correlated positively with wristwatch use. Findings were in line with previous studies, indicating that both the five time perspective dimensions can be identified cognitively, and their pattern of relationships with other variables are comparable across cultures.

Éste artículo evalúa la validez de constructo y la validez discriminante del Inventario de Perspectiva Temporal de Zimbardo (Zimbardo Time Perspective Inventory, ZTPI) de una muestra de 247 estudiantes brasileños. La estructura de cinco-factores de ZTPI, definidos por Pasado-Negativo, Presente-Hedonístico, Futuro, Pasado-Positivo y Presente-Fatalista, provee un ajuste aceptable de los datos, y pareció ser mejor estadísticamente que el ajuste de los modelos alternativos. El Presente-Hedonístico fue positivamente correlacionado con el consumo de alcohol y negativamente con la religiosidad, el Futuro fue correlacionado positivamente con la preocupación por la salud y negativamente con el consumo de alcohol, y el Pasado-Positivo fue positivamente correlacionado con el uso del reloj. Los resultados encontrados concuerdan con los estudios anteriores, indicando que las cinco dimensiones de perspectiva del tiempo pueden ser identificadas cognitivamente. Además los patrones de correlación con otras variables son comparables a través de otras culturas.

A utilização do QSG-12 na população geral: estudo de sua validade de construto / The use of the GHQ-12 in a general population: a study of its construct validity

O presente estudo procurou conhecer a validade de construto do QSG-12 na população geral, não clínica. Compuseram a amostra 306 voluntários de diferentes bairros de João Pessoa, com idade média de 34 anos (DP = 13,8; amplitude de 18 a 84 anos), igualmente distribuídos quanto ao sexo (homens = 152; mulheres = 154), com escolaridade predominante equivalente ao ensino médio (42,5 por cento). Estes responderam três medidas: Escala de Satisfação com a Vida, Escala de Afetos Positivos e Negativos e Questionário de Saúde Geral (QSG-12). Os resultados indicaram ser mais adequado considerar esta última medida como bifatorial, representada pelos fatores ansiedade (a = 0,66) e depressão (a = 0,81). Conforme esperado, tais fatores se correlacionaram com a Escala de Satisfação com a Vida e a Escala de Afetos Positivos e Afetos Negativos, demonstrando a validade convergente do QSG-12. Estes resultados são discutidos à luz dos estudos previamente realizados, sugerindo-se a possibilidade de considerar uma estrutura multidimensional para entender a saúde mental na população geral.