Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37351115›Full record

ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2023

"Spin" in Observational Studies in Deep Inferior Epigastric Perforator Flap Breast Reconstruction: A Systematic Review.

Patrick J Kim, Morgan Yuan, Jeremy Wu, Lucas Gallo, Kathryn Uhlman, Sophocles H Voineskos, Anne O'Neill, Stefan O P Hofer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Patrick J KimFrom the Michael G. DeGroote School of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Morgan YuanDivision of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Jeremy WuFaculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Lucas GalloDivision of Plastic Surgery, Department of Surgery, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Kathryn UhlmanDivision of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Sophocles H VoineskosDivision of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Anne O'NeillDivision of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Stefan O P HoferDivision of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The deep inferior epigastric artery perforator (DIEP) flap is widely used in autologous breast reconstruction. However, the technique relies heavily on nonrandomized observational research, which has been found to have high risk of bias. "Spin" can be used to inappropriately present study findings to exaggerate benefits or minimize harms. The primary objective was to assess the prevalence of spin in nonrandomized observational studies on DIEP reconstruction. The secondary objectives were to determine the prevalence of each spin category and strategy. Methods: MEDLINE and Embase databases were searched from January 1, 2015, to November 15, 2022. Spin was assessed in abstracts and full-texts of included studies according to criteria proposed by Lazarus et al. Results: There were 77 studies included for review. The overall prevalence of spin was 87.0%. Studies used a median of two spin strategies (interquartile range: 1-3). The most common strategies identified were causal language or claims (n = 41/77, 53.2%), inadequate extrapolation to larger population, intervention, or outcome (n = 27/77, 35.1%), inadequate implication for clinical practice (n = 25/77, 32.5%), use of linguistic spin (n = 22/77, 28.6%), and no consideration of the limitations (n = 21/77, 27.3%). There were no significant associations between selected study characteristics and the presence of spin. Conclusions: The prevalence of spin is high in nonrandomized observational studies on DIEP reconstruction. Causal language or claims are the most common strategy. Investigators, reviewers, and readers should familiarize themselves with spin strategies to avoid misinterpretation of research in DIEP reconstruction.

Identifiers

PMID37351115
PMCPMC10284325

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.