Eight Out of Every Ten Abstracts of Low Back Pain Systematic Reviews Presented Spin and Inconsistencies With the Full Text: An Analysis of 66 Systematic Reviews.

STUDY DESIGN Overview study. BACKGROUND Abstracts of systematic reviews have presented 'spin' (i.e. overstated interpretation of study results) and inconsistency with the full text. OBJECTIVES 1. Do abstracts of low back pain reviews contain spin? 2. Do these abstracts consistently represent the full text? 3. Is abstract spin associated with the type of conclusion? METHODS We searched the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) on 10th January 2018. Data were extracted from systematic reviews of physiotherapy interventions for low back pain, published between 2015 and 2017. Spin was assessed using a 7-item checklist. We evaluated consistency by comparing information contained in the abstract and the full text using the 7-item checklist with Kappa coefficient analysis. We used logistic regression analysis to evaluate the association between spin in the abstract and type of conclusion. We evaluated methodological quality using the AMSTAR-2 (A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews). RESULTS We included 66 eligible systematic reviews, subdivided into Cochrane (n=9) and non-Cochrane (n=57) reviews. There was some form of spin in 80% of abstracts. Abstracts of non-Cochrane reviews were not consistent with the full text (fair to moderate agreement). Cochrane review abstracts had substantial to almost perfect agreement with the full text. Spin was not associated with the type of conclusion in all systematic reviews (P < 0.05). The methodological quality ranged from 'high' to 'critically low'. CONCLUSIONS The abstracts of systematic reviews evaluating physiotherapy interventions for low back pain need improvement. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther, Epub 23 Aug 2019. doi:10.2519/jospt.2020.8962.

• Publication year

  2019

• Venue

  Journal of Orthopaedic and Sports Physical Therapy

• Publication date

  Unknown publication date

• Fields of study

  Medicine

• Identifiers
  DOI 10.2519/jospt.2020.8962PMID 31443622
• External record

  Open on Semantic Scholar

• Source metadata

  Semantic Scholar, PubMed

• No claims are published for this paper.

• No concepts are published for this paper.

• Abstracts of low back pain trials are poorly reported, contain spin of information and are inconsistent with the full text: An overview study.

  2019cited by this paper
• What low back pain is and why we need to pay attention.

  2018cited by this paper
• Prevention and treatment of low back pain: evidence, challenges, and promising directions.

  2018cited by this paper
• The over-representation of significant p values in abstracts compared to corresponding full texts: A systematic review of surgical randomized trials

  2017cited by this paper
• ‘Spin’ in published biomedical literature: A methodological systematic review

  2017cited by this paper
• AMSTAR 2: a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomised or non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both

  2017cited by this paper
• Low back pain and sciatica: summary of NICE guidance

  2017cited by this paper
• Interpretation of health news items reported with or without spin: protocol for a prospective meta-analysis of 16 randomised controlled trials

  2017cited by this paper
• Diagnostic triage for low back pain: a practical approach for primary care

  2017cited by this paper
• The evolving role of physical therapists in the long-term management of chronic low back pain: longitudinal care using assisted self-management strategies

  2016cited by this paper
• Motor Control Exercise for Nonspecific Low Back Pain: A Cochrane Review

  2016cited by this paper
• ROBIS: A new tool to assess risk of bias in systematic reviews was developed

  2016cited by this paper
• Surgical Versus Nonsurgical Treatment for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis

  2016cited by this paper
• Epidemiology and Reporting Characteristics of Systematic Reviews of Biomedical Research: A Cross-Sectional Study

  2016cited by this paper
• A new classification of spin in systematic reviews and meta-analyses was developed and ranked according to the severity.

  2016cited by this paper
• Global, regional, and national disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) for 315 diseases and injuries and healthy life expectancy (HALE), 1990–2015: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2015

  2016cited by this paper
• Deficiencies in the publication and reporting of the results of systematic reviews presented at scientific medical conferences.

  2015cited by this paper
• PRISMA for Abstracts: Reporting Systematic Reviews in Journal and Conference Abstracts

  2013cited by this paper
• Reporting quality of systematic review abstracts in leading oral implantology journals.

  2013cited by this paper
• Reporting completeness of abstracts of systematic reviews published in leading dental specialty journals.

  2013cited by this paper
• Non-specific low back pain.

  2012cited by this paper
• Transparent reporting of studies relevant to physical therapy practice.

  2011cited by this paper
• CENTRAL, PEDro, PubMed, and EMBASE Are the Most Comprehensive Databases Indexing Randomized Controlled Trials of Physical Therapy Interventions

  2011cited by this paper
• Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement.

  2010cited by this paper
• Reporting and interpretation of randomized controlled trials with statistically nonsignificant results for primary outcomes.

  2010cited by this paper
• AMSTAR is a reliable and valid measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews.

  2009cited by this paper
• Cochrane reviews used more rigorous methods than non-Cochrane reviews: survey of systematic reviews in physiotherapy.

  2009cited by this paper
• Non-Cochrane vs. Cochrane reviews were twice as likely to have positive conclusion statements: cross-sectional study.

  2009cited by this paper

• Spin in systematic reviews of rehabilitation journals was high prevalence: Meta-epidemiological study.

  2025cites this paper
• Exploring the methodological quality and risk of bias in 200 systematic reviews: A comparative study of ROBIS and AMSTAR-2 tools

  2025cites this paper
• Most Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses Reporting Clinical Outcomes of the Remplissage Procedure Have at Least 1 Form of Spin

  2024cites this paper
• Development and Evaluation of a Framework for Identifying and Addressing Spin for Harms in Systematic Reviews of Interventions

  2024cites this paper
• Narrative bias ("spin") is common in randomised trials and systematic reviews of cannabinoids for pain.

  2024cites this paper
• Yet another problem with systematic reviews: A living review update.

  2024cites this paper
• Misreporting study results in main texts and abstracts of randomized controlled trials published by physical therapy researchers (SPIN)

  2023cites this paper
• Reporting quality of abstracts and inconsistencies with full text articles in pediatric orthopedic publications

  2023cites this paper
• Effects of music-based interventions on cancer-related pain, fatigue, and distress: an overview of systematic reviews

  2023cites this paper
• Thirty-year survey of bibliometrics used in the research literature of pain: Analysis, evolution, and pitfalls

  2023cites this paper
• Analysis of Spin in the Reporting of Studies on Electroanalgesia for Musculoskeletal Pain.

  2023cites this paper
• An Evaluation of Spin in the Abstracts of Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses on the Treatment of Psoriasis: A Cross-sectional Analysis.

  2023cites this paper
• Spin within systematic review abstracts on antiplatelet therapies after acute coronary syndrome: a cross-sectional study

  2022cites this paper
• Evaluation of spin in the abstracts of systematic reviews and meta-analyses relating to postoperative nausea and vomiting

  2022cites this paper
• Evaluation of "Spin" in the Abstracts of Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses of Therapeutic Interventions Published in High-Impact Plastic Surgery Journals: A Systematic Review.

  2022cites this paper
• Evaluation of spin in the abstracts of systematic reviews and meta‐analyses focused on the treatment of obesity

  2021cites this paper
• Methodological quality was critically low in 9/10 systematic reviews in advanced cancer patients - a methodological study.

  2021cites this paper
• Do not make clinical decisions based on abstracts of healthcare research: A systematic review.

  2021influential citation
• Evaluation of Spin in the Abstracts of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Studies on Opioid Use Disorder

  2021cites this paper
• Over 30% of systematic reviews and meta-analyses focused on rotator cuff tear treatments contained spin in the abstract.

  2021cites this paper
• Evaluation of Spin in the Abstracts of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Atopic Dermatitis Treatments and Interventions

  2021cites this paper
• Evaluation of spin in the abstracts of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of treatments and interventions for smoking cessation

  2021cites this paper
• Evidence of spin in systematic reviews of interventions from the top 5 general medical journals: Overview of reviews.

  2021cites this paper
• Evaluating Spin in the Abstracts of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses on Cannabis Use Disorder

  2021influential citation
• Spin infrequently occurs in abstracts of systematic reviews for the pharmacological treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus

  2021cites this paper
• Evaluation of spin in the abstracts of emergency medicine systematic reviews and meta-analyses

  2021cites this paper
• Spin in Abstracts of Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses of Melanoma Therapies: Cross-sectional Analysis

  2021cites this paper
• Systematic reviews in review.

  2020cites this paper
• Evaluation of Spin in the Abstracts of Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses of Treatments for Glaucoma.

  2020cites this paper
• Factors associated with the reporting quality of low back pain systematic review abstracts in physical therapy: a methodological study.

  2020cites this paper
• Should low-quality evidence dominate high-level evidence? A systematic review and meta-analysis of systematic reviews of musculoskeletal physical therapy interventions

  2020cites this paper
• An Evaluation of the Presence of Spin in the Abstracts of Tonsillectomy Systematic Reviews

  2020cites this paper
• Deep Impact: 4 Tips for Authors and Journal Editors to Improve Altmetric Scores.

  2020cites this paper
• The 22nd Anniversary of the Cochrane Back and Neck Group.

  2020cites this paper
• Extent and prevalence of Spin in Randomized Controlled Trials in Dentistry.

  2020cites this paper
• Journal impact factor is associated with PRISMA endorsement, but not with the methodological quality of low back pain systematic reviews: a methodological review

  2019cites this paper