Does a research article's country of origin affect perception of its quality and relevance? A national trial of US public health researchers

M. Harris, J. Macinko, G. Jimenez, M. Mahfoud, C. Anderson

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Objectives: The source of research may influence one's interpretation of it in either negative or positive ways, however, there are no robust experiments to determine how source impacts on one's judgment of the research article. We determine the impact of source on respondents' assessment of the quality and relevance of selected research abstracts. Design: Web-based survey design using four healthcare research abstracts previously published and included in Cochrane Reviews. Setting: All Council on the Education of Public Healthaccredited Schools and Programmes of Public Health in the USA. Participants: 899 core faculty members (full, associate and assistant professors) Intervention: Each of the four abstracts appeared with a high-income source half of the time, and lowincome source half of the time. Participants each reviewed the same four abstracts, but were randomly allocated to receive two abstracts with high-income source, and two abstracts with low-income source, allowing for within-abstract comparison of quality and relevance Primary outcome measures: Within-abstract comparison of participants' rating scores on two measures-strength of the evidence, and likelihood of referral to a peer (1'10 rating scale). OR was calculated using a generalised ordered logit model adjusting for sociodemographic covariates. Results: Participants who received high income country source abstracts were equal in all known characteristics to the participants who received the abstracts with low income country sources. For one of the four abstracts (a randomised, controlled trial of a pharmaceutical intervention), likelihood of referral to a peer was greater if the source was a high income country (OR 1.28, 1.02 to 1.62, p

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article numbere008993
JournalBMJ Open
Volume5
Issue number12
DOIs
StatePublished - 2015

Fingerprint

Public Health
Research Personnel
Research
Referral and Consultation
Public Health Schools
Health Services Research
Randomized Controlled Trials
Logistic Models
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
Education
Pharmaceutical Preparations
Surveys and Questionnaires

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Does a research article's country of origin affect perception of its quality and relevance? A national trial of US public health researchers. / Harris, M.; Macinko, J.; Jimenez, G.; Mahfoud, M.; Anderson, C.

In: BMJ Open, Vol. 5, No. 12, e008993, 2015.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Harris, M. ; Macinko, J. ; Jimenez, G. ; Mahfoud, M. ; Anderson, C. / Does a research article's country of origin affect perception of its quality and relevance? A national trial of US public health researchers. In: BMJ Open. 2015 ; Vol. 5, No. 12.
@article{2911b03e1881402c9994fc565439f0a7,
title = "Does a research article's country of origin affect perception of its quality and relevance? A national trial of US public health researchers",
abstract = "Objectives: The source of research may influence one's interpretation of it in either negative or positive ways, however, there are no robust experiments to determine how source impacts on one's judgment of the research article. We determine the impact of source on respondents' assessment of the quality and relevance of selected research abstracts. Design: Web-based survey design using four healthcare research abstracts previously published and included in Cochrane Reviews. Setting: All Council on the Education of Public Healthaccredited Schools and Programmes of Public Health in the USA. Participants: 899 core faculty members (full, associate and assistant professors) Intervention: Each of the four abstracts appeared with a high-income source half of the time, and lowincome source half of the time. Participants each reviewed the same four abstracts, but were randomly allocated to receive two abstracts with high-income source, and two abstracts with low-income source, allowing for within-abstract comparison of quality and relevance Primary outcome measures: Within-abstract comparison of participants' rating scores on two measures-strength of the evidence, and likelihood of referral to a peer (1'10 rating scale). OR was calculated using a generalised ordered logit model adjusting for sociodemographic covariates. Results: Participants who received high income country source abstracts were equal in all known characteristics to the participants who received the abstracts with low income country sources. For one of the four abstracts (a randomised, controlled trial of a pharmaceutical intervention), likelihood of referral to a peer was greater if the source was a high income country (OR 1.28, 1.02 to 1.62, p",
author = "M. Harris and J. Macinko and G. Jimenez and M. Mahfoud and C. Anderson",
year = "2015",
doi = "10.1136/bmjopen-2015-008993",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "5",
journal = "BMJ Open",
issn = "2044-6055",
publisher = "BMJ Publishing Group",
number = "12",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Does a research article's country of origin affect perception of its quality and relevance? A national trial of US public health researchers

AU - Harris, M.

AU - Macinko, J.

AU - Jimenez, G.

AU - Mahfoud, M.

AU - Anderson, C.

PY - 2015

Y1 - 2015

N2 - Objectives: The source of research may influence one's interpretation of it in either negative or positive ways, however, there are no robust experiments to determine how source impacts on one's judgment of the research article. We determine the impact of source on respondents' assessment of the quality and relevance of selected research abstracts. Design: Web-based survey design using four healthcare research abstracts previously published and included in Cochrane Reviews. Setting: All Council on the Education of Public Healthaccredited Schools and Programmes of Public Health in the USA. Participants: 899 core faculty members (full, associate and assistant professors) Intervention: Each of the four abstracts appeared with a high-income source half of the time, and lowincome source half of the time. Participants each reviewed the same four abstracts, but were randomly allocated to receive two abstracts with high-income source, and two abstracts with low-income source, allowing for within-abstract comparison of quality and relevance Primary outcome measures: Within-abstract comparison of participants' rating scores on two measures-strength of the evidence, and likelihood of referral to a peer (1'10 rating scale). OR was calculated using a generalised ordered logit model adjusting for sociodemographic covariates. Results: Participants who received high income country source abstracts were equal in all known characteristics to the participants who received the abstracts with low income country sources. For one of the four abstracts (a randomised, controlled trial of a pharmaceutical intervention), likelihood of referral to a peer was greater if the source was a high income country (OR 1.28, 1.02 to 1.62, p

AB - Objectives: The source of research may influence one's interpretation of it in either negative or positive ways, however, there are no robust experiments to determine how source impacts on one's judgment of the research article. We determine the impact of source on respondents' assessment of the quality and relevance of selected research abstracts. Design: Web-based survey design using four healthcare research abstracts previously published and included in Cochrane Reviews. Setting: All Council on the Education of Public Healthaccredited Schools and Programmes of Public Health in the USA. Participants: 899 core faculty members (full, associate and assistant professors) Intervention: Each of the four abstracts appeared with a high-income source half of the time, and lowincome source half of the time. Participants each reviewed the same four abstracts, but were randomly allocated to receive two abstracts with high-income source, and two abstracts with low-income source, allowing for within-abstract comparison of quality and relevance Primary outcome measures: Within-abstract comparison of participants' rating scores on two measures-strength of the evidence, and likelihood of referral to a peer (1'10 rating scale). OR was calculated using a generalised ordered logit model adjusting for sociodemographic covariates. Results: Participants who received high income country source abstracts were equal in all known characteristics to the participants who received the abstracts with low income country sources. For one of the four abstracts (a randomised, controlled trial of a pharmaceutical intervention), likelihood of referral to a peer was greater if the source was a high income country (OR 1.28, 1.02 to 1.62, p

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84960427719&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84960427719&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-008993

DO - 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-008993

M3 - Article

VL - 5

JO - BMJ Open

JF - BMJ Open

SN - 2044-6055

IS - 12

M1 - e008993

ER -