corner
Healthy Skepticism
Join us to help reduce harm from misleading health information.
Increase font size   Decrease font size   Print-friendly view   Print
Register Log in

Healthy Skepticism Library item: 6449

Warning: This library includes all items relevant to health product marketing that we are aware of regardless of quality. Often we do not agree with all or part of the contents.

 

Publication type: Journal Article

Rochon PA, Gurwitz JH, Cheung CM, Hayes JA, Chalmers TC.
Evaluating the quality of articles published in journal supplements compared with the quality of those published in the parent journal.
JAMA 1994 Jul 13; 272:(2):108-13


Abstract:

OBJECTIVES—To determine the relationship between the quality of articles and whether they were published in a supplement or in the parent journal. DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SELECTION—All randomized control trials of drug therapies in adults published in the American Journal of Cardiology, the American Journal of Medicine and the American Heart Journal from January 1990 and obtained in November 1992 by means of a MEDLINE search. A total of 318 abstracts appeared to meet our inclusion additional 76 were excluded. DATA EXTRACTION— Three reviewers who were “blinded” and thus unaware of supplement status independently assessed the quality of each of the remaining 242 articles according to a standard quality scoring system. DATA SYNTHESIS- Overall, 67 27.7%) of the articles were published in journal supplements. Article quality scores ranged from 4.2% to 87.5%, with a mean (+/ SD) score of 37.2% +/- 13.1%. Quality scores were lower in articles published in journal supplements than in those published in the parent journal (t [240] =2.61, P = .01). The mean quality score for articles published in journal supplements was 33.6% +/- 12.8% compared with a score of 38.5% +/- 13.1% for articles published in the parent journal. Supplement articles included in their final analysis a smaller proportion of the patients initially randomized (t75 = 2.8, P = .007). CONCLUSION—Our findings suggest that randomized control trials published in journal supplements are generally of inferior quality compared with articles published in the parent journal. The review process surrounding the publication of journal supplements should be consistent with that of the parent journal.

Keywords:
*systematic review/journal supplements/quality of information/randomized controlled trials, evaluation of/PROMOTION DISGUISED: JOURNAL SUPPLEMENTS, CONTROLLED CIRCULATION JOURNALS AND NEWSLETTERS Peer Review, Research/standards* Periodicals/standards* Quality Control Randomized Controlled Trials Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't Research Support, U.S. Gov't, P.H.S.

 

  Healthy Skepticism on RSS   Healthy Skepticism on Facebook   Healthy Skepticism on Twitter

Please
Click to Register

(read more)

then
Click to Log in
for free access to more features of this website.

Forgot your username or password?

You are invited to
apply for membership
of Healthy Skepticism,
if you support our aims.

Pay a subscription

Support our work with a donation

Buy Healthy Skepticism T Shirts


If there is something you don't like, please tell us. If you like our work, please tell others.

Email a Friend








Far too large a section of the treatment of disease is to-day controlled by the big manufacturing pharmacists, who have enslaved us in a plausible pseudo-science...
The blind faith which some men have in medicines illustrates too often the greatest of all human capacities - the capacity for self deception...
Some one will say, Is this all your science has to tell us? Is this the outcome of decades of good clinical work, of patient study of the disease, of anxious trial in such good faith of so many drugs? Give us back the childlike trust of the fathers in antimony and in the lancet rather than this cold nihilism. Not at all! Let us accept the truth, however unpleasant it may be, and with the death rate staring us in the face, let us not be deceived with vain fancies...
we need a stern, iconoclastic spirit which leads, not to nihilism, but to an active skepticism - not the passive skepticism, born of despair, but the active skepticism born of a knowledge that recognizes its limitations and knows full well that only in this attitude of mind can true progress be made.
- William Osler 1909