====== Rhetorical Inflation ======

**Rhetorical inflation** refers to the use of **exaggerated or overly assertive language** to make study results, arguments, or conclusions appear more significant, definitive, or impactful than the underlying evidence justifies.

===== Characteristics =====
  * Overstating clinical significance (e.g., “effective treatment” based on marginal or non-significant findings)
  * Using emotionally charged or persuasive phrasing to mask methodological limitations
  * Drawing **strong conclusions from weak, exploratory, or underpowered data**
  * Presenting **correlation as causation** without acknowledging alternative explanations

===== Examples in Clinical Literature =====
  * Claiming “breakthrough” or “landmark” results from a **small, single-center pilot study**
  * Asserting “optimal dosing identified” in a **post hoc secondary analysis**
  * Using phrases like “robust benefit,” “clearly effective,” or “clinically proven” without statistical support

===== Why It Matters =====
  * **Misleads readers**, clinicians, and policymakers
  * Contributes to **publication bias** and **false expectations**
  * Undermines **evidence-based medicine** by elevating rhetoric over rigor

===== Related Terms =====
  * [[conceptual_ambiguity|Conceptual Ambiguity]]
  * [[overgeneralization|Overgeneralization]]
  * [[publication_bias|Publication Bias]]
  * [[spin|Scientific Spin]]

===== See Also =====
  * [[critical_review|How to critically read a scientific article]]
  * [[language_bias|Language Bias in Medical Literature]]