Peer review reduces spin in PCORI research reports

Area of Science:

• Health Services Research
• Scientific Communication
• Research Integrity

Background:

• The Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) mandates public peer review and posting of final research reports.
• PCORI peer review standards emphasize methodological rigor and ethical scientific communication, aiming to prevent 'spin' in results presentation and interpretation.

Purpose of the Study:

• To assess the prevalence and types of spin identified in PCORI-funded research reports during peer review.
• To evaluate the extent to which authors addressed reviewer feedback on spin.
• To determine if PCORI peer review influenced the presence of spin in associated journal articles.

Main Methods:

• Two independent raters evaluated PCORI peer review feedback for spin in 64 research reports submitted by April 2018.
• Identified types of spin included reporting bias, inappropriate interpretation, extrapolation, and attribution of causality.
• Assessed author responses to spin-related comments and the presence of similar spin in linked journal articles.

Main Results:

• Spin was identified in 86% of submitted PCORI research reports, with reporting bias and inappropriate interpretation being most common.
• Authors addressed spin-related comments in 85% of reports.
• Of associated journal articles, 61% contained spin identified during PCORI peer review, with no difference in spin prevalence before or after PCORI review.

Conclusions:

• Spin is prevalent in research reports submitted to PCORI, similar to journal articles.
• PCORI's peer review process effectively mitigated spin within the submitted reports.
• PCORI peer review did not demonstrably reduce spin in the corresponding published journal articles, suggesting a need for broader interventions.