↓ Skip to main content

Can We Trust Positive Findings of Intervention Research? The Role of Conflict of Interest

Overview of attention for article published in Prevention Science, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (61st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
45 Mendeley
Title
Can We Trust Positive Findings of Intervention Research? The Role of Conflict of Interest
Published in
Prevention Science, April 2016
DOI 10.1007/s11121-016-0648-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Dennis M. Gorman

Abstract

In recent years, there has been increased attention to the issue of conflict of interest within prevention research. The aims of this paper are to discuss these developments and to relate them to discussions of conflict of interest in the broader scientific literature. Although there has been concern expressed about the extent to which conflicts of interest can be defined and measured, empirical research suggests that financial conflicts can be easily identified and assessed in meta-analyses focused on their effects on research quality. Research evidence also shows that conflict of interest is associated with use of flexible data analysis practices and the reporting of chance positive findings, both within prevention research and related disciplines such as public health and psychology. However, the overwhelming majority of published studies report positive results, and there are a number of other influences within academia (such as pressure to publish) that account for this and for the use of flexible data analysis practices. Accordingly, introducing measures to improve research quality in general, rather than just focusing on problems specific to research in which there is a clearly identifiable conflict of interest, may prove more effective and less controversial. Most such efforts focus on introducing greater transparency into research design, practice, and reporting. These both curtail employment of flexible data analysis practices and make their use transparent to investigators seeking to assess their effects on research quality. Also, requiring detailed disclosures of conflicts be reported by all investigators (not just senior authors) would improve current disclosure practices.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 45 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 8 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 13%
Researcher 5 11%
Student > Master 5 11%
Student > Bachelor 3 7%
Other 8 18%
Unknown 10 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 10 22%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 11%
Social Sciences 5 11%
Business, Management and Accounting 4 9%
Engineering 2 4%
Other 4 9%
Unknown 15 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 June 2018.
All research outputs
#5,664,716
of 22,865,319 outputs
Outputs from Prevention Science
#356
of 1,032 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#80,057
of 299,155 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Prevention Science
#8
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,865,319 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,032 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 299,155 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its contemporaries.