Clarification of Reporting of Potential Conflicts of Interest in JAMA Articles

Clarification of Reporting of Potential Conflicts of Interest in JAMA Articles Letters might occur for different reasons, which could become process, is difficult to determine even through careful manual apparent in content analysis. analysis. For instance, interrater reliability in a study assess- Investigators should not have to fear that null findings will ing spin in RCTs with statistically nonsignificant primary out- be of little interest to the scientific community, general pub- comes was moderate (κ = 0.47). Likewise, although it is well lic, or journals. However, spin, underreporting, misreport- accepted that RCTs with null results face additional barriers ing, publication lag, and double standards in evaluation are cru- to publication, this is difficult to quantify without data on ac- cial aspects to consider before investigators and the public can ceptance or rejection metrics from journals. be reassured that fears of publication bias are unjustified. Cristea and Gentili state: “Investigators should not have to fear that null findings will be of little interest to the scien- Ioana A. Cristea, PhD tific community, general public, or journals.” On that point, we Claudio Gentili, MD, PhD are entirely in agreement. Author Affiliations: Department of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, James A. Heathers, PhD Babes-Bolyai University, Cluj-Napoca, Romania (Cristea); Department of Jason M. Nagata, MD http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png JAMA American Medical Association

Clarification of Reporting of Potential Conflicts of Interest in JAMA Articles

JAMA, Volume 322 (12) – Sep 24, 2019

Loading next page...
 
/lp/american-medical-association/clarification-of-reporting-of-potential-conflicts-of-interest-in-jama-9YOLBTlBLi
Publisher
American Medical Association
Copyright
Copyright 2019 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.
ISSN
0098-7484
eISSN
1538-3598
DOI
10.1001/jama.2019.12743
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Letters might occur for different reasons, which could become process, is difficult to determine even through careful manual apparent in content analysis. analysis. For instance, interrater reliability in a study assess- Investigators should not have to fear that null findings will ing spin in RCTs with statistically nonsignificant primary out- be of little interest to the scientific community, general pub- comes was moderate (κ = 0.47). Likewise, although it is well lic, or journals. However, spin, underreporting, misreport- accepted that RCTs with null results face additional barriers ing, publication lag, and double standards in evaluation are cru- to publication, this is difficult to quantify without data on ac- cial aspects to consider before investigators and the public can ceptance or rejection metrics from journals. be reassured that fears of publication bias are unjustified. Cristea and Gentili state: “Investigators should not have to fear that null findings will be of little interest to the scien- Ioana A. Cristea, PhD tific community, general public, or journals.” On that point, we Claudio Gentili, MD, PhD are entirely in agreement. Author Affiliations: Department of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, James A. Heathers, PhD Babes-Bolyai University, Cluj-Napoca, Romania (Cristea); Department of Jason M. Nagata, MD

Journal

JAMAAmerican Medical Association

Published: Sep 24, 2019

References

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Search

Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly

Organize

Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.

Access

Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve

Freelancer

DeepDyve

Pro

Price

FREE

$49/month
$360/year

Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed

Create folders to
organize your research

Export folders, citations

Read DeepDyve articles

Abstract access only

Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles

Print

20 pages / month

PDF Discount

20% off