The DOI matches its Crossref record; 23 of the 23 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Effect of interpretive bias on research evidence
Open accessAbstract
Doctors are being encouraged to improve their critical appraisal skills to make better use of medical research. But when using these skills, it is important to remember that interpretation of data is inevitably subjective and can itself result in bias.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Kaptchuk54 has summarised a number of potential interpretative biases that have become widespread in science reporting, including a confirmation bias, where one tends to evaluate evidence that supports one’s beliefs more favourably than evidence that challenges it.”
From The limited prosocial effects of meditation: A systematic review and meta-analysis (2018) · cites this paper as [54]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The Structure of Scientific Revolutions
Kuhn, T. S., & Schlegel, R. (1963) · Physics Today · doi:10.1063/1.3050879 · Cited by 35,538
Sackett, D. L. (1979) · Journal of Chronic Diseases · doi:10.1016/0021-9681(79)90012-2 · Cited by 2,075
Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes
(1998) · Edward Elgar Publishing eBooks · doi:10.4337/9781781954249.00075 · Cited by 1,817
Ziegler, E. J., Fisher, C. J., Sprung, C. L., Straube, R., SADOFF, J. C., Foulke, G. E., Wortel, C. H., Fink, M. P., Dellinger, R. P., Teng, N. N. H., et al. (1991) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm199102143240701 · Cited by 1,618
Effects of Estrogen Replacement on the Progression of Coronary-Artery Atherosclerosis
Herrington, D. M., Reboussin, D. M., Brosnihan, K. B., Sharp, P. C., Shumaker, S. A., Snyder, T. E., Furberg, C. D., Kowalchuk, G. J., Stuckey, T. D., Rogers, W. J., et al. (2000) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm200008243430801 · Cited by 1,242
Effect of the Antiarrhythmic Agent Moricizine on Survival after Myocardial Infarction
The Cardiac Arrhythmia Suppression Trial II Investigators* (1992) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm199207233270403 · Cited by 1,012
The uncertainty principle and industry-sponsored research
Djulbegović, B., Lacevic, M., Cantor, A. B., Fields, K. K., Bennett, C. L., Adams, J. R., Kuderer, N. M., & Lyman, G. H. (2000) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(00)02605-2 · Cited by 485
Treatment of Chronic Stable Angina
Murphy, M. L., Hultgren, H. N., Detre, K. M., Thomsen, J. H., Takaro, T., & Study, P. O. T. V. A. C. (1977) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm197709222971201 · Cited by 476
Toulmin, S. E. (2001) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 474
Rosenthal, R. (1963) · PubMed · Cited by 366
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- Rosenthal, 1963, Three experiments in experimenter bias., Psychol Rep Monog, 3, 12
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 201–222 of 222
Azende, P. M. (2018) · University of Huddersfield Repository (University of Huddersfield)
Design: Sampling, Clinical Trials
Hoffman, J. I. E. (2019) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-817084-7.00038-3
Gong, A. T. (2018) · UCL Discovery (University College London)
Publishing Biomedical Research Findings
Scherer, A. G. (2019) · Chapman & Hall/CRC eBooks · doi:10.1201/9780429202872-29
Meehan, D. (2019) · eSource (Dublin Business School)
Workload-Aware Systems and Interfaces for Cognitive Augmentation
Kosch, T. (2020) · Elektronische Hochschulschriften der LMU München (Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2010.07703 · Cited by 3
Investigating Maine Secondary Science Teachers Conceptualization of Scientific Argumentation
Doran, E. (2020) · DigitalCommons (California Polytechnic State University)
Marshall, J. (2020) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-55841-3_8
Gupta, S. K., Tiwari, R. K., & Goel, R. K. (2021) · Perspectives in Clinical Research · doi:10.4103/picr.picr_137_19
Avoiding Cognitive Biases When Reading Research Studies
King, T. L. (2021) · Journal of Midwifery & Women s Health · doi:10.1111/jmwh.13234
Response to letter to the editor
Rikkert, L. G., Nieuwland, R., Terstappen, L. W. M. M., & Coumans, F. A. W. (2019) · Journal of Extracellular Vesicles · doi:10.1080/20013078.2019.1648997
(2021) · Archives des maladies professionnelles et de médecine du travail/Archives des maladies professionnelles et de l'environnement · doi:10.1016/j.admp.2021.08.005
Systematische Fehler in klinischen Studien
Golder, W. A. (2019) · Pneumo News · doi:10.1007/s15033-019-1219-5
Interpreting and Implementing Evidence for Quality Research
Cahan, E. M., & Shea, K. G. (2022) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-07105-8_13
Reply to Letter: OAGB after Sleeve: Gastric Recalibration is Mandatory
Hany, M., Zidan, A., Elmongui, E., & Torensma, B. (2022) · Obesity Surgery · doi:10.1007/s11695-022-06340-1
MAFLD vs. NAFLD not an emotional political process - rather Evidence-Based Medicine
Muthiah, M. D., Sanyal, A. J., & Noureddin, M. (2022) · Annals of Hepatology · doi:10.1016/j.aohep.2022.100883
Stroster, J. A. (2013) · UA Campus Repository (The University of Arizona)
Circular Reasoning in Climate Change ResearchPreprint
Munshi, J. (2018) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.3130131
Discourses of multicultural teams : implications for policy practice in open and distance learning
Nyoni, J. (2012) · Unisa Institutional Repository (University of South Africa)
Metadata
- Authors
- Kaptchuk, T. J.
- Affiliations
- Harvard University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Kaptchuk, Ted J
- ORCID
- Kaptchuk, Ted J
- Venue
- BMJ
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 2003-06-25
- Volume
- 326
- Issue
- 7404
- Pages
- 1453-1455
- ISSN
- 0007-1447 (ISSN-L)
- 0959-8138
- 1468-5833
- PMC
- PMC1126323
- OpenAlex
- W2101782914
- Cited by
- 222
- References
- 23
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 22 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 14
- FWCI
- 7.76
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Licence
- www.bmj.com/company/legal-information/terms-conditions/legal-information/tdm-licencepolicy (tdm)
- Locations
- BMJ (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- DigitalGeorgetown (Georgetown University Library) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institutes of Health (5r01at000402-04)
- National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health (1R01 AT00402-01, R01AT001414)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Epidemiology
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Sciences Research and Education
- Keywords
- interpretation bias, critical appraisal
- MeSH terms
- Data Interpretation, Statistical, Quality Control, Research, Reproducibility of Results, Bias
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
