Abstract
‘White hat bias’ (WHB) (bias leading to distortion of information in the service of what may be perceived to be righteous ends) is documented through quantitative data and anecdotal evidence from the research record regarding the postulated predisposing and protective effects of nutritively sweetened beverages and breastfeeding, respectively, on obesity. Evidence of an apparent WHB is found in a degree sufficient to mislead readers. WHB bias may be conjectured to be fuelled by feelings of righteous zeal, indignation toward certain aspects of industry or other factors. Readers should beware of WHB, and our field should seek methods to minimize it.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Relevant articles
Open Access articles citing this article.
-
The Commercial Determinants of Health and Evidence Synthesis (CODES): methodological guidance for systematic reviews and other evidence syntheses
Systematic Reviews Open Access 14 September 2023
-
Methods for trustworthy nutritional recommendations NutriRECS (Nutritional Recommendations and accessible Evidence summaries Composed of Systematic reviews): a protocol
BMC Medical Research Methodology Open Access 05 December 2018
Access options
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 12 print issues and online access
$259.00 per year
only $21.58 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on Springer Link
- Instant access to full article PDF
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
References
Allison DB, Mattes RD . Nutritively sweetened beverage consumption and obesity: the need for solid evidence on a fluid issue. JAMA 2009; 301: 318–320.
Cope MB, Allison DB . Critical review of the World Health Organization's (WHO) 2007 report on ′evidence of the long-term effects of breastfeeding: systematic reviews and meta-analysis′ with respect to obesity. Obes Rev 2008; 9: 594–605.
Mattes RD, Shikany JM, Allison BD . What is the demonstrated value of moderating nutritively sweetened beverage consumption in reducing weight gain or promoting weight loss? An evidence-based review and meta-analysis of randomized studies. (Submitted for publication).
James J, Thomas JT, Cavan D, Kerr D . Preventing childhood obesity by reducing consumption of carbonated drinks: cluster randomised controlled trial. BMJ 2004; 328: 123743.
Ebbeling CB, Feldman HA, Osganian SK, Chomitz VR, Ellenbogen SJ, Ludwig DS . Effects of decreasing sugar-sweetened beverage consumption on body weight in adolescents: a randomized, controlled pilot study. Pediatrics 2006; 117: 673–680.
Vartanian LR, Schwartz MB, Brownell KD . Effects of soft drink consumption on nutrition and health: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Public Health 2007; 97: 667–675.
Sterne JAC, Egger M . Regression methods to detect publication and other bias in meta-analysis. In: Rothstein HR, Sutton AJ, Borenstein M (eds). Publication Bias in Meta-Analysis. John Wiley & Sons Ltd: West Sussex, UK, 2005.
Horta B, Bahl R, Martines J, Victora C . Evidence of the Long-Term Effects of Breastfeeding: Systematic Reviews and Meta- Analysis. World Health Organization Publication: Geneva, Switzerland, 2007.
Woloshin S, Schwartz LM, Casella SL, Kennedy AT, Larson RJ . Press releases by academic medical centers: not so academic? Ann Intern Med 2009; 150: 613–618.
Raben A, Vasilaras TH, Møller AC, Astrup A . Sucrose compared with artificial sweeteners: different effects on ad libitum food intake and body weight after 10 wk of supplementation in overweight subjects. Am J Clin Nutr 2002; 76: 721–729.
Brownell KD, Warner KE . The perils of ignoring history: big tobacco played dirty and millions died. How similar is Big Food? Milbank Q 2009; 87: 259–294.
Levene M, Roberts P (eds). The Massacre in History (Studies on War and Genocide). Berghahn Books: Oxford, UK, 1999.
Acknowledgements
We gratefully acknowledge Dr Alfred A Bartolucci for his comments on our data analysis and Dr Lenny Vartanian for sharing his data file. Supported in part by the NIH grant P30DK056336. The opinions expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NIH or any other organization with which the authors are affiliated.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Cope, M., Allison, D. White hat bias: examples of its presence in obesity research and a call for renewed commitment to faithfulness in research reporting. Int J Obes 34, 84–88 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1038/ijo.2009.239
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/ijo.2009.239
This article is cited by
-
The Commercial Determinants of Health and Evidence Synthesis (CODES): methodological guidance for systematic reviews and other evidence syntheses
Systematic Reviews (2023)
-
A Systems Approach to Understanding and Improving Research Integrity
Science and Engineering Ethics (2019)
-
Methods for trustworthy nutritional recommendations NutriRECS (Nutritional Recommendations and accessible Evidence summaries Composed of Systematic reviews): a protocol
BMC Medical Research Methodology (2018)