Retracted publications in pharmacy systematic reviews.

OBJECTIVE: Systematic reviews and other evidence syntheses, the pinnacle of the evidence pyramid, embody comprehensiveness and rigor; however, retracted data are being incorporated into these publications. This study examines the use of retracted publications in the field of pharmacy, describes characteristics of retracted publications cited by systematic reviews, and discusses factors associated with citation likelihood. METHODS: Using data from Retraction Watch, we identified retracted publications in the pharmacy field. We identified all articles citing these retracted publications in Web of Science and Scopus and limited results to systematic reviews. We classified the retraction reason, determined whether the citation occurred before or after retraction, and analyzed factors associated with the likelihood of systematic reviews citing a retracted publication. RESULTS: Of 1,396 retracted publications, 283 were cited 1,096 times in systematic reviews. Most (65.0%) (712/1096) citations occurred before retraction. Citations were most often to items retracted due to data falsification or manipulation (39.2%), followed by items retracted due to ethical misconduct including plagiarism (30.4%), or concerns about or errors in data or methods (26.2%). Compared to those not cited in systematic reviews, cited items were significantly more likely to be retracted due to data falsification and manipulation, were published in high impact factor journals, and had longer delays between publication and retraction. CONCLUSIONS: Further analysis of systematic reviews citing retracted publications is needed to determine the impact of flawed data. Librarians understand the nuances involved and can advocate for greater transparency around the retraction process and increase awareness of challenges posed by retractions.

ROLE OF LIBRARIANS AND INFORMATION PROFESSIONALS IN IDENTIFYING dPROS IN THE EVIDENCE.

While dental patient-reported outcomes provide important insight to why patients seek oral health care, finding research literature on these outcomes as well as measures for dental patient-reported outcomes is quite difficult due to a lack of standardization in both indexing terms as well as reporting practices. This results in these outcomes and measures often being underutilized. Librarians and information professionals are experts in navigating and managing research literature. Additionally, librarians are powerful collaborators for evidence-based practice, and can provide support for research methodology design and reporting. This article explores how partnering with librarians and information professionals can benefit clinicians and researchers to further the utilization of dental patient-reported outcomes in patient care.

Addressing Disparities in Physician Access to Information in Support of Evidence-based Practice.

The purpose of this study is to determine if Minnesota physicians have access to information resources needed to support evidence-based practice (EBP), which supports a culture of safety and patient-centered care. A survey was used to determine Minnesota physicians' need for, and access to, evidence-based clinical information. A total of 877 responses (6.4% response rate) were included in the data analysis. Participants spent 24 min daily seeking answers to clinical questions and averaged 4.41 questions per day that could not be immediately answered. Physicians reported high levels of information needs met (85.8%), though they reported limited access to drug resources, citation databases, systematic reviews, and full-text books and articles. Results also showed use of unreliable sources to support decision-making. A key finding was the extent to which workplace affiliation broadens disparities in information access. National and regional approaches can work to support EBP by reducing the information gap caused by workplace affiliation and other barriers. Further research should be done to identify partnerships, funding, infrastructure, and support to address these gaps.

The continued citation of retracted publications in dentistry.

OBJECTIVE: Publications are retracted for many reasons, but the continued use and citation of retracted publications presents a problem for future research. This study investigated retractions in the dental literature to understand the characteristics of retracted publications, the reasons for their retractions, and the nature and context of their citations after retraction. METHODS: In September 2018, the authors identified retracted dentistry publications using the Retraction Watch database. Citations to those publications were retrieved from Scopus and Web of Science. Characteristics of retracted publications and their citations were collected, including study design, reasons for retraction, and nature of citation (positive, negative, or neutral). We used chi-square tests to determine if there were notable differences between retracted publications that were cited following retraction and those that were not, and if there were relationships between the nature of the citation, the study design of the original publication, and its reason for retraction. RESULTS: Of the 136 retracted publications, 84 were cited after retraction. When restricted to English language, 81 retracted publications received citations from 685 publications. Only 5.4% of the citations noted the retracted status of the original publication, while 25.3% of citations were neutral and 69.3% were positive. Animal studies were more likely to be uncited after retraction, while in vitro studies and randomized controlled trials were more likely to be cited. Retracted publications that were cited negatively were more likely to have been retracted due to scientific distortion than those that were cited positively or neutrally. Retracted publications that were cited negatively were also more likely to be observational studies than those cited positively or neutrally. CONCLUSION: Retracted publications in dentistry are continually cited positively following their retraction, regardless of their study designs or reasons for retraction. This indicates that the continued citation of retracted publications in this field cannot be isolated to certain research methods or misconduct but is, instead, a more widespread issue.

Endogenous pain modulation in chronic orofacial pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Abnormal endogenous pain modulation was suggested as a potential mechanism for chronic pain, ie, increased pain facilitation and/or impaired pain inhibition underlying symptoms manifestation. Endogenous pain modulation function can be tested using psychophysical methods such as temporal summation of pain (TSP) and conditioned pain modulation (CPM), which assess pain facilitation and inhibition, respectively. Several studies have investigated endogenous pain modulation function in patients with nonparoxysmal orofacial pain (OFP) and reported mixed results. This study aimed to provide, through a qualitative and quantitative synthesis of the available literature, overall estimates for TSP/CPM responses in patients with OFP relative to controls. MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane databases were searched, and references were screened independently by 2 raters. Twenty-six studies were included for qualitative review, and 22 studies were included for meta-analysis. Traditional meta-analysis and robust variance estimation were used to synthesize overall estimates for standardized mean difference. The overall standardized estimate for TSP was 0.30 (95% confidence interval: 0.11-0.49; P = 0.002), with moderate between-study heterogeneity (Q [df = 17] = 41.8, P = 0.001; I = 70.2%). Conditioned pain modulation's estimated overall effect size was large but above the significance threshold (estimate = 1.36; 95% confidence interval: -0.09 to 2.81; P = 0.066), with very large heterogeneity (Q [df = 8] = 108.3, P < 0.001; I = 98.0%). Sensitivity analyses did not affect the overall estimate for TSP; for CPM, the overall estimate became significant if specific random-effect models were used or if the most influential study was removed. Publication bias was not present for TSP studies, whereas it substantially influenced CPM's overall estimate. These results suggest increased pain facilitation and trend for pain inhibition impairment in patients with nonparoxysmal OFP.

Measuring the health literacy of the Upper Midwest.

OBJECTIVES: Health literacy-the ability to obtain, process, and understand basic health information-is a major determinant of an individual's overall health and health care utilization. In this project, the authors examined predictors of health literacy levels, including numeracy and graphic literacy, among an adult population in the Upper Midwest. METHODS: The research was conducted at the Minnesota State Fair. Three previously validated scales were used to assess health literacy: Newest Vital Sign, the General Health Numeracy Test, and questions from Galesic and Garcia-Retamero's Graph Literacy Scale. Demographic information-such as age, educational attainment, zip code, and other potential predictors and modifiers-was collected. Multivariate linear regression was conducted to examine the independent effects of educational attainment, race, ethnicity, gender, and rural or urban location on overall health literacy and scores on each of the individual instruments. RESULTS: A total of 353 Upper Midwest residents completed the survey, with the majority being white, college-educated, and from an urban area. Having a graduate or professional degree or being under the age of 21 were associated with increased health literacy scores, while having a high school diploma or some high school education, being Asian American, or being American Indian/Alaska Native were associated with lower health literacy scores. CONCLUSION: Advanced health literacy skills, including the ability to calculate and compare information, were problematic even in well-educated populations. Understanding numerical and graphical information was found to be particularly difficult, and more research is needed to understand these deficits and how best to address them.