Standing on the shoulders of bias: lack of transparency and reporting of critical rigor characteristics in pain research

Ashley N Plumb; Joseph B Lesnak; Giovanni Berardi; Kazuhiro Hayashi; Adam J Janowski; Angela F Smith; Dana Bailey; Cassie Kerkman; Zoe Kienenberger; Ben Martin; Ethan Patterson; Hannah Van Roekel; Carol G T Vance; Kathleen A Sluka

doi:10.1097/j.pain.0000000000002874

Back

Standing on the shoulders of bias: lack of transparency and reporting of critical rigor characteristics in pain research

Journal article

Peer reviewed

Standing on the shoulders of bias: lack of transparency and reporting of critical rigor characteristics in pain research

Ashley N Plumb, Joseph B Lesnak, Giovanni Berardi, Kazuhiro Hayashi, Adam J Janowski, Angela F Smith, Dana Bailey, Cassie Kerkman, Zoe Kienenberger, Ben Martin, …

Pain (Amsterdam), Vol.164(8), pp.1775-1782

08/2023

DOI: 10.1097/j.pain.0000000000002874

PMCID: PMC10356741

PMID: 36877823

Files and links (1)

url

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10356741/pdf/nihms-1865980.pdfView

Open Access

Abstract

Rigorous experimental design with transparent reporting in biomedical science reduces risk of bias and allows for scientists to judge the quality of the research. Basic factors of rigor such as blinding, randomization, power analysis, and inclusion of both sexes impact the reproducibility by reducing experimental bias. We designed a systematic study to analyze basic factors of rigor, inclusion of sex, and whether data were analyzed or disaggregated by sex over the past 10 years in the journal PAIN. Studies that included humans reported randomization in 81%, blinding in 48%, and the use of a power analysis calculation in 27% over the past 10 years. Studies that included mice reported randomization in 35%, blinding in 70%, and the use of a power analysis in 9%. Studies that included rats reported randomization in 38%, blinding in 63%, and the use of power analysis in 12%. This study also found that human studies consistently included both sexes over the past decade, but less than 20% of data were disaggregated or analyzed for sex differences. Although mouse and rat studies predominately used males only, there has been a slight increase in inclusion of both sexes over the past few years. Justification for single-sex studies was below 50% in both human and rodent data. In both human and animal studies, transparency in reporting of experimental design and inclusion of both sexes should be considered standard practice and will result in improved quality and reproducibility of published research.

Details

Title: Subtitle: Standing on the shoulders of bias: lack of transparency and reporting of critical rigor characteristics in pain research
Creators: Ashley N Plumb - University of Iowa
Joseph B Lesnak
Giovanni Berardi
Kazuhiro Hayashi
Adam J Janowski
Angela F Smith
Dana Bailey
Cassie Kerkman
Zoe Kienenberger
Ben Martin
Ethan Patterson
Hannah Van Roekel
Carol G T Vance
Kathleen A Sluka
Resource Type: Journal article
Publication Details: Pain (Amsterdam), Vol.164(8), pp.1775-1782
DOI: 10.1097/j.pain.0000000000002874
PMID: 36877823
PMCID: PMC10356741
NLM abbreviation: Pain
eISSN: 1872-6623
Language: English
Electronic publication date: 03/06/2023
Date published: 08/2023
Academic Unit: Stead Family Department of Pediatrics; Iowa Neuroscience Institute; Nursing; Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation Science; Neuroscience and Pharmacology
Record Identifier: 9984375452502771

Metrics

11 Record Views

16 Times Cited - Web of Science

See more details