RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Spin, or the inappropriate formatting of information to emphasize certain outcomes, should not be present in research. This study focuses on identifying and characterizing the presence of spin in systematic review and meta-analysis abstracts that focus on the treatment of opioid use disorder. Methods: Search strategies were developed to identify studies pertaining to the treatment of opioid use disorder. The studies were then screened by two authors. These qualifying studies were then evaluated for the presence of spin within their abstracts by two trained authors. These studies were also evaluated by the AMSTAR-2 standards to evaluate the quality of the qualifying systematic reviews by two trained reviewers. Results: The sample in this study included 113 systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Spin was present in 20 of these studies (20/113, 17.7%). The most common spin form was spin type 3 (6/20, 30%), followed by types 5 and 9 (both 4/20, 20%), type 6 (3/20, 15%), type 7 (2/20, 10%), and type 8 (1/20, 5%). The remaining spin types 1, 2, and 4 were not present in the sample. Of the 113 included studies, the most common intervention type was pharmacologic (93/113, 82%). No significant association was found between the quality of a systematic review and the presence of spin. Conclusions: Findings in this study show positive trends in prevalence of five forms of spin evaluated in abstracts of systematic reviews and meta-analyses looking at treatments for opioid use disorder. However, study quality had no significant association with the presence of spin. Misrepresentation of results, or spin, may alter a clinician's perceptions about treatment efficacies. Therefore, increasing physician awareness of spin may improve clinical decision-making.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Management options for patients with primary immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) have increased, and treatment of patients with ITP has changed during the past 10 years. METHODS: To document current practice and to determine how current practice is related to recommendations of 2 recent practice guidelines for ITP, an International Consensus report and an American Society of Hematology (ASH) guideline, the authors surveyed practicing hematologists-oncologists in Oklahoma. Surveys were specific for children or adults. Each survey had 3 questions describing patients with a new diagnosis and patients who had not achieved remission with initial treatment. Questions were adapted from the clinical scenarios of the ASH guideline. RESULTS: Twelve (92%) Oklahoma pediatric hematologists-oncologists responded; 82 (81%) Oklahoma adult hematologists-oncologists responded. For a child with a new diagnosis of ITP, a platelet count of 8000/µL and minor bleeding, 5 (42%) hematologists-oncologists selected observation without drug treatment (recommended by both guidelines). For an adult with a platelet count of 9000/µL who had failed to respond to initial treatment with corticosteroids and IVIg, 32 (39%) selected splenectomy (recommended by the ASH guideline); 30 (37%) selected rituximab and 13 (16%) selected thrombopoietin-receptor agonists (both recommended by the International Consensus report). Hematologists-oncologists who had more years in practice were more likely to select splenectomy (P = 0.047). CONCLUSIONS: In a time of changing management for patients with ITP, these data document reported current management in Oklahoma and provide a basis for serial comparisons across time and for comparisons with other regions and comparison of management with patient outcomes.