IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0028437.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Funding Source and Research Report Quality in Nutrition Practice-Related Research

Author

Listed:
  • Esther F Myers
  • J Scott Parrott
  • Deborah S Cummins
  • Patricia Splett

Abstract

Background: The source of funding is one of many possible causes of bias in scientific research. One method of detecting potential for bias is to evaluate the quality of research reports. Research exploring the relationship between funding source and nutrition-related research report quality is limited and in other disciplines the findings are mixed. Objective: The purpose of this study is to determine whether types of funding sources of nutrition research are associated with differences in research report quality. Design: A retrospective study of research reporting quality, research design and funding source was conducted on 2539 peer reviewed research articles from the American Dietetic Association's Evidence Analysis Library® database. Results: Quality rating frequency distributions indicate 43.3% of research reports were rated as positive, 50.1% neutral, and 6.6% as negative. Multinomial logistic regression results showed that while both funding source and type of research design are significant predictors of quality ratings (χ2 = 118.99, p

Suggested Citation

  • Esther F Myers & J Scott Parrott & Deborah S Cummins & Patricia Splett, 2011. "Funding Source and Research Report Quality in Nutrition Practice-Related Research," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(12), pages 1-13, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0028437
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0028437
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0028437
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0028437&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0028437?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0028437. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.