Skip to main content

Table 2 ANOVA analysis of the primary and secondary outcomes of the abstract with or without funding disclosure and with a positive or negative study outcome

From: The effects of industry funding and positive outcomes in the interpretation of clinical trial results: a randomized trial among Dutch psychiatrists

 

Funding (N = 206)

No Funding (N = 187)

Mean Difference (MD)

95% CI

Credibilitya

4.64

4.76

0.12

−0.28 to 0.47

Clinical relevance

5.30

5.16

0.14

−0.54 to 0.27

Interest in reading the full article

4.51

4.65

0.14

−0.40 to 0.71

Methodological quality (sum score)b

38.65

38.87

0.22

−1.82 to 2.17

 

Negative outcome (N = 200)

Positive outcome (N = 193)

Mean Difference (MD)

95% CI

Credibilitya

5.10

4.29

0.81

0.43 to 1.18

Clinical relevancea

5.16

5.30

0.14

−0.28 to 0.53

Interest in reading the full articlea

4.31

4.85

0.54

0.09 to 1.12

Methodological quality (sum score)b

5,63

5,44

0.19

−3.31 to 0.68

  1. a10-point Likertscale score
  2. bAverage score on a 10-point Likertscale of the seven individual items regarding methodological quality (see Additional file 1: Table S1)