Effect of interpretive bias on research evidenceBMJ 2003; 326 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.326.7404.1453 (Published 26 June 2003) Cite this as: BMJ 2003;326:1453
- w1. Koehler JJ. The influence of prior belief on scientific judgment of evidence quality. Organizational Behavior and Human Decisions Processes 1993;56:28-55.
w2. Mitroff II. The subjective side of science: a philosophic inquiry into the psychology of the Apollo moon scientists. New York: Elsevier, 1974.
w3. Kosso P. Reading the book of nature: an introduction to the philosophy of science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992.
w4. Holton G. Thematic origins of scientific thought. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1988.
w5. Hulley S, Grady D, Bush T, Furberg C, Herrington D, Riggs B, et al. Randomized trial of estrogen plus progestin for secondary prevention of coronary heart disease in postmenopausal women. JAMA 1998;280:605-13.
w6. Echt DS, Liebson PR, Mitchell LB, Peters RW, Obias-Manno D, Barker AH, et al. Mortality and morbidity in patients receiving encainide, flecainide, or placebo. The cardiac arrhythmia suppression trial. N Engl J Med 1991;324:781-8.
w7. Rosenthal R, Lawson R. A longitudinal study of the effects of experimenter bias on the operant learning of laboratory rats. J Psychiatr Res 19;2:61-72.
w8. Rosenthal R, Halas ES, Experimenter effect in the study of invertebrate behavior. Psychol Rep 1962;11:251-6.
w9. Fischer BH, Marks M, Reich T. Hyperbaric-oxygen treatment for multiple sclerosis. A randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind study. N Engl J Med 1983;308:181-6.
- Letter Published: 25 September 2003; BMJ 327 doi:10.1136/bmj.327.7417.752-a
- Analysis Published: 03 January 2008; BMJ 336 doi:10.1136/bmj.39379.359560.AD
- ResearchEffects of acupuncture on rates of pregnancy and live birth among women undergoing in vitro fertilisation: systematic review and meta-analysisPublished: 06 March 2008; BMJ 336 doi:10.1136/bmj.39471.430451.BE
- Return of the “firm” gets cautious welcomeBMJ December 07, 2016, 355 i6556; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.i6556
- NHS hospitals must help patients quit smoking, says British Thoracic SocietyBMJ December 07, 2016, 355 i6571; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.i6571
- US to ban smoking in public housingBMJ December 06, 2016, 355 i6562; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.i6562
- Advice on sugar and starch is urged in type 2 diabetes counsellingBMJ December 06, 2016, 355 i6543; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.i6543
- Evidence review ordered by government backs minimum alcohol pricingBMJ December 05, 2016, 355 i6546; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.i6546
- Effect of spin in the abstract of a randomised controlled trial on physiotherapists perception of treatment benefit: a randomised controlled trial
- Looking Back, Looking Forward: The Ethical Framing of Complementary and Alternative Medicine in Oncology Over the Last 20 Years
- 'Cognitive biases plus: covert subverters of healthcare evidence
- Does a research article's country of origin affect perception of its quality and relevance? A national trial of US public health researchers
- Recognizing and reducing cognitive bias in clinical and forensic neurology
- Understanding the side effects of glucocorticoid therapy: shining a light on a drug everyone thinks they know
- Transparency and disclosure, neutrality and balance: shared values or just shared words?
- Five Reasons That Many Comparative Effectiveness Studies Fail To Change Patient Care And Clinical Practice
- Subjective judgements in scientific practice and art
- When is the practice of pathology malpractice?
- Accounting for uncertainty about investigator bias: disclosure is informative: How could disclosure of interests work better in medicine, epidemiology and public health?
- Overinterpretation of Clinical Applicability in Molecular Diagnostic Research
- Effects of acupuncture on rates of pregnancy and live birth among women undergoing in vitro fertilisation: systematic review and meta-analysis
- Listen to the data when results are not significant
- Intravenously administered vitamin C as cancer therapy: three cases.
- Systematic reviews of health effects of social interventions: 2. Best available evidence: how low should you go?
- Statistical interpretation can also bias research evidence