ABS: Christakis, Do physicians judge a study by its cover? An investigation of journal attribution bias
Gretchen Whitney
gwhitney at UTKUX.UTCC.UTK.EDU
Mon Oct 2 20:54:13 EDT 2000
author: dachris at u.washington.edu
Title : Do physicians judge a study by its cover? An investigation
of journal attribution bias
Author : Christakis DA, Saint S, Saha S, Elmore JG, Welsh DE, Baker
P, Koepsell TDJ
Journal : JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY 53: (8) 773-778 AUG 2000
Document type: Article Language: English Cited References: 11
Times Cited: 0
Abstract:
The effect of a journal's prestige on readers' impressions of an article is
unknown. Two hypotheses were tested: first, that attribution of a study to
a " high" prestige journal would be associated with improved impressions
and attribution to a "low" prestige journal would be associated with
diminished impressions; and second, that formal training in epidemiology
and biostatistics would mitigate the effects of this journal attribution
bias.
The study was designed as a trial among a random sample of 264
internists. Participants were asked to read an article and an abstract
from either the Southern Medical Journal (SMJ) or the New England Journal
of Medicine (NEJM). Questionnaires were constructed that either attributed
the article or abstract to its source or presented it as
unattributed. After each article or abstract, respondents were asked to
rate the quality of the study, the appropriateness of the methodology
employed, the significance of the findings, and its likely effects on
their practice. A 20-point impression score was created based on responses
to these statements. The effect of attribution to a specific journal and
formal epidemiology training on impression scores were assessed using
linear regression. Of the 399 eligible participants, 264 questionnaires
were returned (response rate 66%). Differences in impression scores
associated with attribution of an article or abstract to the NEJM were .71
[95% C.I. (-.44-1.87)] and .50 [95% C.I. (-.87-1.87)]
respectively; differences in impression scores associated with attribution
of an article or abstract to the SMJ were -.12 [95% C.I. (-1.53-1.30)] and
-.95 [95% C.I. (-2.41-.52)]. A stratified analysis demonstrated that
epidemiology training did not meaningfully alter the effect of journal
attribution on participants' impression scores. If journal attribution bias
exists, it is likely to exert small and clinically insignificant
effects when physicians read articles carefully. Formal training in
epidemiology and biostatistics does not appear to alter these
results.
(C) 2000 Elsevier science Inc. All rights reserved.
Author Keywords:
evidence based medicine, mete-analysis, blinding, bias
Addresses:
Christakis DA, Univ Washington, Inst Child Hlth, 146 N Canal St, Suite 300,
Seattle, WA 98103 USA.
Univ Washington, Inst Child Hlth, Seattle, WA 98103 USA.
Univ Washington, Div Gen Pediat, Seattle, WA 98195 USA.
Univ Michigan, Div Gen Internal Med, Ann Arbor, MI 48109 USA.
Oregon Hlth Sci Univ, Portland VA Med Ctr, Div Gen Internal Med, Portland,
OR 97201 USA.
Univ Washington, Div Gen Internal Med, Seattle, WA 98195 USA.
Univ Washington, Dept Epidemiol, Seattle, WA 98195 USA.
Ann Arbor VA Hlth Serv Res & Dev, Ann Arbor, MI USA.
Seattle VA Med Ctr, Seattle, WA USA.
Univ Washington, Dept Hlth Serv, Seattle, WA 98195 USA.
Publisher:
PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD, OXFORD
IDS Number:
347CA
ISSN:
0895-4356
Cited Author Cited Work Volume Page Year
*ISI J CITATION REPORTS
1997
BERLIN JA LANCET 350
105 1997
FLETCHER RH J GEN INTERN MED 12 S5
1997
GARFIELD E SCIENCE 178
471 1972
JANSSENS J NEW ENGL J MED 322 1028
1990
KELLEY RE SOUTHERN MED J 83 433
1990
KLEINBAUM D APPL REGRESSION ANAL 1998
LOCK S BRIT MED J 284
1289 1982
OWEN R JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC 247 2533
1982
PATCHELL RA NEW ENGL J MED 322 494
1990
SEELIG CB SOUTHERN MED J 83 1144
1990
-------------------------------
(c) ISI, Reprinted with permission
Please visit their website at www.isinet.com
More information about the SIGMETRICS
mailing list