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
Boutron, I. (2010) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2010.651 · Cited by 842
Hyperbaric oxygen for carbon monoxide poisoning
Buckley, N. A., Juurlink, D. N., Isbister, G. K., Bennett, M., & Lavonas, E. J. (2011) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd002041.pub3 · Cited by 383
Rumpf, H.-J., Achab, S., Billieux, J., Bowden-Jones, H., Carragher, N., Demetrovics, Z., Higuchi, S., King, D. L., Mann, K., Potenza, M., et al. (2018) · Journal of Behavioral Addictions · doi:10.1556/2006.7.2018.59 · Cited by 300
“…one’s own preconceptions more positively compared to the evidence that challenges these preconceptions (confirmation bias), or the “time will tell” bias that refers to the tendency for different scientists to have different requirements in relation to confirmatory evidence (Kaptchuk, 2003).”
BackgroundInfluentialIntravenously administered vitamin C as cancer therapy: three cases
Padayatty, S. J. (2006) · Canadian Medical Association Journal · doi:10.1503/cmaj.050346 · Cited by 257
Persistence of Contradicted Claims in the Literature
Tatsioni, A., Bonitsis, N. G., & Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2007) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.298.21.2517 · Cited by 229
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
