“Spin” in Observational Studies in Deep Inferior Epigastric Perforator Flap Breast Reconstruction: A Systematic Review
Background:. The deep inferior epigastric artery perforator (DIEP) flap is widely used in autologous breast reconstruction. However, the technique relies heavily on nonrandomized observational research, which has been found to have high risk of bias. “Spin” can be used to inappropriately present stu...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Wolters Kluwer
2023-06-01
|
| Series: | Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Global Open |
| Online Access: | http://journals.lww.com/prsgo/fulltext/10.1097/GOX.0000000000005095 |
| _version_ | 1797792008083865600 |
|---|---|
| author | Patrick J. Kim, BHSc Morgan Yuan, MD Jeremy Wu, BMSc Lucas Gallo, MD Kathryn Uhlman, MD Sophocles H. Voineskos, MD, FRCSC Anne O’Neill, MBBCh, PhD Stefan O.P. Hofer, MD, PhD |
| author_facet | Patrick J. Kim, BHSc Morgan Yuan, MD Jeremy Wu, BMSc Lucas Gallo, MD Kathryn Uhlman, MD Sophocles H. Voineskos, MD, FRCSC Anne O’Neill, MBBCh, PhD Stefan O.P. Hofer, MD, PhD |
| author_sort | Patrick J. Kim, BHSc |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Background:. The deep inferior epigastric artery perforator (DIEP) flap is widely used in autologous breast reconstruction. However, the technique relies heavily on nonrandomized observational research, which has been found to have high risk of bias. “Spin” can be used to inappropriately present study findings to exaggerate benefits or minimize harms. The primary objective was to assess the prevalence of spin in nonrandomized observational studies on DIEP reconstruction. The secondary objectives were to determine the prevalence of each spin category and strategy.
Methods:. MEDLINE and Embase databases were searched from January 1, 2015, to November 15, 2022. Spin was assessed in abstracts and full-texts of included studies according to criteria proposed by Lazarus et al.
Results:. There were 77 studies included for review. The overall prevalence of spin was 87.0%. Studies used a median of two spin strategies (interquartile range: 1–3). The most common strategies identified were causal language or claims (n = 41/77, 53.2%), inadequate extrapolation to larger population, intervention, or outcome (n = 27/77, 35.1%), inadequate implication for clinical practice (n = 25/77, 32.5%), use of linguistic spin (n = 22/77, 28.6%), and no consideration of the limitations (n = 21/77, 27.3%). There were no significant associations between selected study characteristics and the presence of spin.
Conclusions:. The prevalence of spin is high in nonrandomized observational studies on DIEP reconstruction. Causal language or claims are the most common strategy. Investigators, reviewers, and readers should familiarize themselves with spin strategies to avoid misinterpretation of research in DIEP reconstruction. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-13T02:26:53Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-35d7a096cdbe4b8fb8086300c18fe4a6 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2169-7574 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-13T02:26:53Z |
| publishDate | 2023-06-01 |
| publisher | Wolters Kluwer |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Global Open |
| spelling | doaj.art-35d7a096cdbe4b8fb8086300c18fe4a62023-06-30T01:49:19ZengWolters KluwerPlastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Global Open2169-75742023-06-01116e509510.1097/GOX.0000000000005095202306000-00048“Spin” in Observational Studies in Deep Inferior Epigastric Perforator Flap Breast Reconstruction: A Systematic ReviewPatrick J. Kim, BHSc0Morgan Yuan, MD1Jeremy Wu, BMSc2Lucas Gallo, MD3Kathryn Uhlman, MD4Sophocles H. Voineskos, MD, FRCSC5Anne O’Neill, MBBCh, PhD6Stefan O.P. Hofer, MD, PhD7From the * Michael G. DeGroote School of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada† Division of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada‡ Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada§ Division of Plastic Surgery, Department of Surgery, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.† Division of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada† Division of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada† Division of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada† Division of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, CanadaBackground:. The deep inferior epigastric artery perforator (DIEP) flap is widely used in autologous breast reconstruction. However, the technique relies heavily on nonrandomized observational research, which has been found to have high risk of bias. “Spin” can be used to inappropriately present study findings to exaggerate benefits or minimize harms. The primary objective was to assess the prevalence of spin in nonrandomized observational studies on DIEP reconstruction. The secondary objectives were to determine the prevalence of each spin category and strategy. Methods:. MEDLINE and Embase databases were searched from January 1, 2015, to November 15, 2022. Spin was assessed in abstracts and full-texts of included studies according to criteria proposed by Lazarus et al. Results:. There were 77 studies included for review. The overall prevalence of spin was 87.0%. Studies used a median of two spin strategies (interquartile range: 1–3). The most common strategies identified were causal language or claims (n = 41/77, 53.2%), inadequate extrapolation to larger population, intervention, or outcome (n = 27/77, 35.1%), inadequate implication for clinical practice (n = 25/77, 32.5%), use of linguistic spin (n = 22/77, 28.6%), and no consideration of the limitations (n = 21/77, 27.3%). There were no significant associations between selected study characteristics and the presence of spin. Conclusions:. The prevalence of spin is high in nonrandomized observational studies on DIEP reconstruction. Causal language or claims are the most common strategy. Investigators, reviewers, and readers should familiarize themselves with spin strategies to avoid misinterpretation of research in DIEP reconstruction.http://journals.lww.com/prsgo/fulltext/10.1097/GOX.0000000000005095 |
| spellingShingle | Patrick J. Kim, BHSc Morgan Yuan, MD Jeremy Wu, BMSc Lucas Gallo, MD Kathryn Uhlman, MD Sophocles H. Voineskos, MD, FRCSC Anne O’Neill, MBBCh, PhD Stefan O.P. Hofer, MD, PhD “Spin” in Observational Studies in Deep Inferior Epigastric Perforator Flap Breast Reconstruction: A Systematic Review Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Global Open |
| title | “Spin” in Observational Studies in Deep Inferior Epigastric Perforator Flap Breast Reconstruction: A Systematic Review |
| title_full | “Spin” in Observational Studies in Deep Inferior Epigastric Perforator Flap Breast Reconstruction: A Systematic Review |
| title_fullStr | “Spin” in Observational Studies in Deep Inferior Epigastric Perforator Flap Breast Reconstruction: A Systematic Review |
| title_full_unstemmed | “Spin” in Observational Studies in Deep Inferior Epigastric Perforator Flap Breast Reconstruction: A Systematic Review |
| title_short | “Spin” in Observational Studies in Deep Inferior Epigastric Perforator Flap Breast Reconstruction: A Systematic Review |
| title_sort | spin in observational studies in deep inferior epigastric perforator flap breast reconstruction a systematic review |
| url | http://journals.lww.com/prsgo/fulltext/10.1097/GOX.0000000000005095 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT patrickjkimbhsc spininobservationalstudiesindeepinferiorepigastricperforatorflapbreastreconstructionasystematicreview AT morganyuanmd spininobservationalstudiesindeepinferiorepigastricperforatorflapbreastreconstructionasystematicreview AT jeremywubmsc spininobservationalstudiesindeepinferiorepigastricperforatorflapbreastreconstructionasystematicreview AT lucasgallomd spininobservationalstudiesindeepinferiorepigastricperforatorflapbreastreconstructionasystematicreview AT kathrynuhlmanmd spininobservationalstudiesindeepinferiorepigastricperforatorflapbreastreconstructionasystematicreview AT sophocleshvoineskosmdfrcsc spininobservationalstudiesindeepinferiorepigastricperforatorflapbreastreconstructionasystematicreview AT anneoneillmbbchphd spininobservationalstudiesindeepinferiorepigastricperforatorflapbreastreconstructionasystematicreview AT stefanophofermdphd spininobservationalstudiesindeepinferiorepigastricperforatorflapbreastreconstructionasystematicreview |