Research Letter: Characterizing spin in psychiatric clinical research literature using large language models
Perlis, R. H.
Show abstract
ImportanceSpin is a common form of biased reporting that misrepresents study results in publications as more positive than an objective assessment would indicate, but its prevalence in psychiatric journals is unknown. ObjectiveTo apply a large language model to characterize the extent to which original reports of pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic interventions in psychiatric journals reflect spin. DesignWe identified abstracts from studies published between 2013 and 2023 in 3 high-impact psychiatric journals describing randomized trials or meta-analyses of interventions. Main Outcome and MeasurePresence or absence of spin estimated by a large language model (GPT4-turbo, turbo-2024-04-09), validated using gold standard abstracts with and without spin. ResultsAmong a total of 663 abstracts, 296 (44.6%) exhibited possible or probable spin - 230/529 (43.5%) randomized trials, 66/134 (49.3%) meta-analyses; 148/310 (47.7%) for medication, 107/238 (45.0%) for psychotherapy, and 41/115 (35.7%) for other interventions. In a multivariable logistic regression model, reports of randomized trials, and non-pharmacologic/non-psychotherapy interventions, were less likely to exhibit spin, as were more recent publications Conclusions and RelevanceA substantial subset of psychiatric intervention abstracts in high-impact journals may contain results presented in a potentially misleading way, with the potential to impact clinical practice. The success in automating spin detection via large language models may facilitate identification and revision to minimize spin in future publications.
Matching journals
The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Noninvasive brain stimulation combined with evidence-based psychotherapy for psychiatric disorders: A meta-analysis of optimal implementation parameters 89%
- Systematic review and meta-analysis of the calibration of confidence judgments in individuals with schizophrenia spectrum disorders 88%
- From Feasibility to Utility: A Meta-Analysis of Amygdala-Neurofeedback 86%
Similar papers in this journal
- Individual participant data systematic reviews with meta-analyses of psychotherapies for borderline personality disorder: A protocol 92%
- Side effect profile and comparative tolerability of newer generation antidepressants in the acute treatment of major depressive disorder in children and adolescents: protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis 91%
- Mechanisms linking physical activity with psychiatric symptoms: a protocol for a systematic review 90%
Similar papers in this journal
- Electronic Health Record Documentation of Psychiatric Assessments in Massachusetts Emergency Department and Outpatient Settings During the COVID-19 Pandemic 89%
- Association between social media use and self-reported symptoms of depression in US adults 86%
- Characterizing Potential Conflicts of Interest Among UpToDate and DynaMed Content Contributors 86%
Similar papers in this journal
- Lexical Stability of Psychiatric Clinical Notes from Electronic Health Records over a Decade 91%
- Monitoring of COVID-19 Pandemic-related Psychopathology using Machine Learning 89%
- Research and Diagnostic Algorithmic Rules (RADAR) for mood disorders, recurrence of illness, suicidal behaviors, and the patient’s lifetime trajectory 87%
Similar papers in this journal
- Sociodemographic Bias in Large Language Model Clinical Trial Screening 87%
- Incorporating Preprints in Systematic Reviews: A Preliminary Study of a Novel Method for Rapid Evidence Synthesis 87%
- Beyond Metrics to Methods: A Scoping Review of Large Language Models for Detection of Social Drivers of Health in Clinical Notes 86%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.