Abstract:Background Nurse-led models of care had been reported as effective intervention approaches for improving health management and reducing hospitalizations of target patients in a number of studies. However, the reporting quality studies in the field varied and there was a lack of literature evaluation. Objective The objective of the study was to assess the reporting quality and spin of abstracts of published randomized controlled trials which had statistically not significant primary outcomes. Moreover, potential factors associated with the presence of spin was also assessed. Methods Studies on nurse-led care were retrieved from PubMed from January 1st, 2017, to December 31st, 2021. Only randomized controlled trials with statistically not significant primary outcomes were included. Study screening and data extraction were carried out by two reviewers independently. The reporting quality of each abstract was evaluated by the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials statement, and spin strategies were analyzed using a pre-designed assessment form. Potential predictors for the presence of spin were analyzed by multivariate logistic regressions. Results The overall reporting quality of the included 75 randomized controlled trial abstracts was not satisfying, with a median score of 16-item Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials statement at 6 (IQR 5, 8). Forty abstracts used at least one spin strategy in abstracts. Among them, 18 (45.0%) used spin strategies in the result section and 39 (97.5%) had spin in the conclusion section. The most common spin strategy identified in abstracts was focusing on statistically significant secondary outcomes (12/40, 30.0%) in the result section and claiming benefit with no consideration of statistically not significant results for the primary outcomes (32/40, 80.0%) in the conclusion section. Based on the definition, 29 (72.5%) abstracts were assessed to have high level of spin in the conclusions of abstracts. By multivariate logistic regression analyses, it was found that only geographic origin (reference: studies from Asian countries, OR = 0.118, 95%CI 0.027 to 0.511, P = 0.004) and the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials statement score (reference: lower score, OR = 0.625, 95%CI 0.470 to 0.829, P = 0.001) were significantly associated with the presence of spin in abstracts. Conclusion Among the randomized controlled trials with statistically not significant primary outcomes in the field of nurse-led care, the reporting quality of abstracts needs to be improved. Trials from Asian countries and with lower Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials statement scores are more likely to present spin in abstracts. Findings reported in the result and conclusion sections of these abstracts need to be interpreted with caution.

SPIN-PM: A consensus framework to evaluate the presence of spin in studies on prediction models

'Spin' in urology non‐randomised studies comparing therapeutic interventions: a temporal analysis

Three randomized controlled trials evaluating the impact of "spin" in health news stories reporting studies of pharmacologic treatments on patients'/caregivers' interpretation of treatment benefit

Evaluation of spin in abstracts of papers in psychiatry and psychology journals

Gaining Confidence on Molecular Classification Through Consensus Modeling and Validation

Spin in the abstracts of randomized controlled trials of nurse-led care: A cross-sectional study

Evaluation of Spin in the Abstracts of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Focused on the Treatment of Acne Vulgaris: Cross-Sectional Analysis (Preprint)

Transparent reporting of multivariable prediction models for individual prognosis or diagnosis: checklist for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (TRIPOD-SRMA)

SPIN: SE(3)-Invariant Physics Informed Network for Binding Affinity Prediction

Poor reporting of multivariable prediction model studies: towards a targeted implementation strategy of the TRIPOD statement

A framework for meta-analysis of prediction model studies with binary and time-to-event outcomes

Protocol for development of a reporting guideline (TRIPOD-AI) and risk of bias tool (PROBAST-AI) for diagnostic and prognostic prediction model studies based on artificial intelligence

SPINNED: Simulation‐based physics‐informed neural network for deconvolution of dynamic susceptibility contrast MRI perfusion data

Transparent reporting of a multivariable prediction model for individual prognosis or diagnosis (TRIPOD): the TRIPOD Statement

TRIPOD+AI statement: updated guidance for reporting clinical prediction models that use regression or machine learning methods

Abstracts of published randomised controlled trials in Endodontics: Reporting quality and spin.

Abstracts of published randomized controlled trials in Endodontics: reporting quality and spin

CONSORT-SPI 2018 Explanation and Elaboration: guidance for reporting social and psychological intervention trials

Evaluation of Spin Bias in Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses of Rotator Cuff Repair With Platelet-Rich Plasma

Reporting of Model Performance and Statistical Methods in Studies That Use Machine Learning to Develop Clinical Prediction Models: Protocol for a Systematic Review

SPIN: Development of sample-specific protein integrity numbers as an index of biospecimen quality