• Jordan I Roszhart, Satish S Kumar, Veerasathpurush Allareddy, Christopher A Childs, and Satheesh Elangovan.
• J Am Dent Assoc. 2019 Nov 18: 26-32.e3.

BackgroundSpin in randomized controlled trial (RCT) abstracts can misguide clinicians. In this cross-sectional analysis, the authors assessed the prevalence of spin in RCT abstracts and explored the factors potentially influencing it.MethodsIn this cross-sectional analysis, the authors conducted a systematic search in top 10 dental journals based on Eigenfactor score and selected RCTs published in 2015 with statistically nonsignificant primary outcomes. The dentistry disciplines covered in these journals include general dentistry, dental research, oral implantology, endodontics, oral surgery, periodontology, and oral oncology. In these RCT abstracts, the authors assessed the prevalence of 3 different categories of spin and factors that could influence its presence using the t test and χ2 test.ResultsSpin assessment performed in the included 75 RCTs revealed the existence of spin in 23 abstracts (30.7%). Associations between the presence of spin in abstracts and the variables international collaborations, commercial support type, number of treatment arms, and journal impact factor were found to be statistically nonsignificant (P ≥ .05).ConclusionsApproximately one-third of the 75 RCT abstracts published in high-impact dental journals in 2015 with nonsignificant outcomes presented with some form of spin, irrespective of funding type and journal impact factor.Practical ImplicationsClinicians should be aware of the potential existence of spin in abstracts and be diligent in reading and appraising the full trial before incorporating its recommendations in clinical practice.Copyright © 2019 American Dental Association. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

5 keywords...

hide…