Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the inappropriate use of causal language in studies on obesity and nutrition. METHODS: Titles and abstracts of 525 peer-reviewed papers in the 4 leading journals in the fields of obesity and nutrition were scrutinized for language implying causality in observational studies published in 2006. RESULTS: Such misleading language appeared in 161 papers (31%) independent of funding source. Remarkably 49% of studies lacking statistically significant primary outcomes used misleading language compared to 29% of those with p values ≤0.05 (chi square p < 0.001). Exculpatory language was present in the body of the text in 19%; of the 161 studies. CONCLUSION: We suggest that editors and reviewers evaluate submissions for misleading reporting.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cofield et al. (2010) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: