You are here

Article Text

Article menu

other Versions

Download PDFPDF
Letter
Spinning wider
  1. Michael Saraga,
  2. Friedrich Stiefel
  1. Service of Liaison Psychiatry, University Hospital of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland
  1. Correspondence to Dr Michael Saraga, Service of Liaison Psychiatry, University Hospital of Lausanne, Lausanne 1011, Switzerland; michael.saraga{at}chuv.ch

https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjebm-2019-111267

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    The recent article by Jellison et al shows how abstracts reporting randomised controlled trials of therapeutic interventions in psychiatry tend to be ‘spinned’ to suggest positive effects of treatments, even when the actual results do not.1 Although the authors do not explicitly address the reasons for such spinning, they suggest that unethical researchers ‘beautify’ their results to increase chances of publication. However, they mention a study by Lazarus et al who found reviewers recommending positive spin in their comments,2 hinting that spinning …

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Contributors MS wrote a first draft of the letter; both authors then revised the manuscript.

    • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

    • Competing interests None declared.

    • Patient consent for publication Not required.

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; internally peer reviewed.