Background: Increasing use of "hype" language (eg, language overstating research impact) has been documented in the scientific community. Evaluating language in abstracts is important because readers may use abstracts to extrapolate findings to entire publications. Our purpose was to assess the frequency of hype language within orthopaedic surgery.

Methods: One hundred thirty-nine hype adjectives were previously identified using a linguistics approach. All publicly available abstracts from 18 orthopaedic surgery journals between 1985 and 2020 were obtained, and hype adjectives were tabulated. Change in frequency of these adjectives was calculated.

Results: A total of 112,916 abstracts were identified. 67.0% (948/1414) of abstracts in 1985 contained hype adjectives, compared with 92.5% (5287/5714) in 2020. The average number of hype adjectives per abstract increased by 136% (1.1 to 2.6). Of the 139 adjectives, 87 (62.5%) increased in frequency and 40 (28.7%) decreased in frequency while 12 (9%) were not used. The hype adjectives with the largest absolute increases in frequency were quality (+324wpm), significant (+320wpm), systematic (+246wpm), top (+239wpm), and international (+201wpm). The five hype adjectives with the largest relative increases in frequency were novel (+10500%), international (+2850%), urgent (+2600%), robust (+2300%), and emerging (+1400%).

Conclusion: Promotional language is increasing in orthopaedic surgery abstracts. Authors, editors, and reviewers should seek to minimize the usage of nonobjective language.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11111393PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.5435/JAAOSGlobal-D-24-00109DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

hype adjectives
24
orthopaedic surgery
12
promotional language
8
language orthopaedic
8
112916 abstracts
8
abstracts 1985
8
1985 2020
8
frequency hype
8
adjectives
8
adjectives largest
8

Similar Publications

Background: Increasing use of "hype" language (eg, language overstating research impact) has been documented in the scientific community. Evaluating language in abstracts is important because readers may use abstracts to extrapolate findings to entire publications. Our purpose was to assess the frequency of hype language within orthopaedic surgery.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Importance: Investigators applying for National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding increasingly use promotional language (or hype) that has the potential to undermine objective evaluation. Whether or not the same investigators use hype in subsequent research reports has yet to be investigated.

Objective: To assess changes in the use of hype in journal abstracts reporting research funded by the NIH and to compare those trends with previously reported trends in the associated NIH funding applications.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF
Article Synopsis
  • The study examines changes in the use of subjective and promotional language, or "hype," in National Institutes of Health (NIH) grant application abstracts from 1985 to 2020, highlighting concerns about the potential impact on research objectivity.
  • A total of 901,717 abstracts were analyzed, revealing that 139 hype adjectives were identified, with 130 of them showing a significant increase in frequency by an average of 1378% over the years.
  • The most notable increases in hype adjectives included terms like "novel" and "critical," demonstrating a trend toward more promotional language in funding applications.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!