5 Findings on Inconsistency in Spine Literature: Abstract vs. Manuscript Featured

Written by  Laura Dyrda | Thursday, 01 May 2014 14:24
Social sharing

A study recently published in Spine compared randomized controlled trial abstract to the manuscripts published in the recent spine literature.

The research included articles from journals Spine, The Spine Journal and Journal of Spinal Disorders and Techniques over a 10-year period. There were 40 manuscripts included in the study. Researchers found:


•    75 percent of studies had at least one inconsistency
•    75 percent titles and 92 percent of abstracts had the word "randomized" but in 37.5 percent the randomization method wasn't described; in 28 percent the description was unacceptable.
•    22.5 percent of abstracts and 47.5 percent of manuscripts had a clearly stated primary outcome.
•    40 percent of abstracts did not include pertinent negatives
•    60 percent of abstracts reported relevant statistically significant results; the remaining did not.


More Articles on Spine Surgery:
Cost-Effectiveness of Spine Surgery: 5 Key Trends
Innovation as an Independent Spine Practice in 2014: Q&A With Dr. Douglas Won
Spinal Cord Injury: Promising Research to Restore Hand Function at UCLA

© Copyright ASC COMMUNICATIONS 2017. Interested in LINKING to or REPRINTING this content? View our policies here.

Top 40 Articles from the Past 6 Months