Skip to main content
. 2022 Oct 31;2:961996. doi: 10.3389/fepid.2022.961996

Table 2.

Classification of linguistic spin in abstracts and main texts of RCTs about AMD.

Linguistic spin categories Abstract (N = 96) Main text (N = 96) Total
Results Conclusion Results Discussion Conclusion
N*(%)/N** N*(%)/N** N*(%)/N** N*(%)/N** N*(%)/N** N*(%)/N**
1 Use of words to reject or explain non-statistically significant results 2 (2.1)/2 0 (0)/0 12 (12.5)/15 12 (12.5)/12 0 (0)/0 26 (5.4)/19
2 Use of words to claim comparable effectiveness or equivalence despite P > 0.05 3 (3.1)/5 0 (0)/0 6 (6.3)/6 1 (1.0)/1 2 (2.1)/2 12 (2.5)/14
3 Use of words to point out the beneficial effect of the treatment investigated 11 (11.4)/14 12 (12.5)/15 38 (39.6)/58 50 (52)/79 29 (30.2)/34 140 (29.2)/200
4 Use of ‘(statistically) significant/significance' without reporting a P-value or a 95% CI for results showing a beneficial effect of the treatment investigated 30 (31.3)/45 16 (16.7)/16 33 (34.4)/63 54 (56.3)/145 15 (15.6)/18 69 (14.4)/287
5 Particular focus on results with statistical significance in abstract and or main text 6 (6.3)/6 1 (1.0)/1 0 (0)/0 0 (0)/0 0 (0)/0 7 (1.5)/7
6 Inconsistency in the significance of the same study results between different sections of the article NA NA NA NA NA 5 (1.0)/5
7 Other 1 (1.0)/1 5 (5.2)/5 5 (5.2)/5 33 (34.4)/45 7 (7.3)/7 51 (10.6)/63

*Number of articles in which a linguistic spin category is found. **Total number of linguistic spin examples of a specific category for all included articles (one category of spin can be scored several times in one article). NA, not applicable.