Content Reporting in Post-Stroke Therapeutic Circuit-Class Exercise Programs in randomized control trials

Description of massage interventions in randomised clinical trials for neck pain; a review using the TIDieR checklist

OBJECTIVE

How interventions are reported can impact the ability to implement these intervention in clinical practice. Therefore, our aim is to assess the reporting of massage interventions in randomised controlled trials for patients with neck pain.

DATA SOURCES

This manuscript concerns a secondary analysis of trials evaluating massage for neck pain selected for a scoping review. An updated literature search was completed using four databases to 31 July 2023.

REVIEW METHODS

Trials were selected that evaluate massage interventions. Two independent assessors extracted descriptive information, methodological quality (PEDro-scale) and assessed completeness of reporting of the intervention using the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDier-checklist). We present frequencies of the extracted data.

RESULTS

We included 35 trials (2840 patients) with neck pain. Most trials (n = 23) included patients with chronic non-specific neck pain. We found a wide variety of massage interventions from Chinese massage, Swedish massage to myofascial release. In addition, the dose, number of sessions and the duration of the intervention varied widely. The methodological quality overall was fair to good (varied between 4-8/10), and we found a moderate completeness of reporting. All trials provided the name of the intervention, 30 (86%) provided a rationale and 26 (74%) trials described details of the massage intervention.

CONCLUSION

The massage interventions were moderately described in trials in patients with neck pain, but provided enough information to guide the decision making for designing future Network Meta-analysis as to what trials need to be considered when grouping massage interventions in a clinically relevant way.

Completeness of intervention reporting in randomised trials of technology-enabled remote or hybrid exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation: a systematic review using the TIDieR framework

BACKGROUND

Exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation improves clinical outcomes and quality of life. Technology-enabled delivery of remote cardiac rehabilitation is as effective in improving health outcomes as in-person delivery and has the potential to transform clinical service delivery. However, for the successful translation of research to clinical practice, interventions must be adequately reported in the literature.

METHODS

Systematic review of MedLine, CINAHL, PubMed and SPORT Discus databases applying PRISMA guidance. Randomised controlled trials of remote or hybrid technology-enabled exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation interventions were included. Completeness of reporting was evaluated against the TIDieR checklist.

RESULTS

The search strategy returned 162 articles which, following screening, resulted in 12 randomised trials being included containing data for 1588 participants. No trial fully reported their rehabilitation intervention as per the 12-item TIDieR checklist, with a median score of eight out of 12 categories. Notably, intervention detail, dosage and modification were comparatively poorly reported.

CONCLUSION

Technology-enabled remotely delivered cardiac rehabilitation may be effective at improving cardiovascular fitness; however, the quality of reporting of these interventions in randomised trials is insufficient for replication which has material implications for translation into clinical practice.

OptiCogs: feasibility of a multicomponent intervention to rehabilitate people with cognitive impairment post-stroke

BACKGROUND

Stroke is a leading cause of death and disability worldwide. Despite the prevalence and associated burden of cognitive impairment post-stroke, there is uncertainty regarding optimal cognitive rehabilitation for people post-stroke. This study aimed to assess whether a multicomponent intervention, called OptiCogs, is feasible, acceptable, and safe for people with cognitive impairment post-stroke. A secondary aim was to explore changes in cognitive function, fatigue, quality of life, physical function, and occupational performance, from pre-intervention to post-intervention.

METHODS

A feasibility study was conducted where people post-stroke with cognitive impairment enrolled in a 6-week multicomponent intervention. The primary outcomes recorded included response rate, recruitment rate, retention rate, adherence to the intervention protocol, adverse events, and acceptability of the intervention to people post-stroke. Secondary outcomes included (i) change in cognitive functioning using the Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination III, (ii) fatigue using the Fatigue Severity scale, (iii) quality of life using the Stroke Specific Quality of Life scale (iv) physical function using the patient-reported outcomes measurement information system, and (v) patient-reported occupational performance using the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure. The Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials extension reporting guidelines were followed, for pilot and feasibility studies, to standardize the conduct and reporting of this study.

RESULTS

The response rate was 10.9%. Nine eligible participants were enrolled during the 4-month recruitment period, with eight participants completing the entire 6-week intervention, as well as the pre- and post-intervention outcome measures. There were no reported adverse events. Participants were satisfied with the intervention and found it acceptable overall. Results of the secondary outcomes were promising for cognitive function (ACE III, pre: 63.3 ± 23.9 to post: 69 ± 24.6), fatigue (FSS, pre: 52.5 ± 7.3 to post: 45.6 ± 7.2), quality of life (SSQoL, pre: 131.0 ± 26.3 to post: 169.9 ± 15.3), physical function (PROMIS-PF, pre: 15.5 ± 6.3 to post: 15.8 ± 5.3), and occupational performance (COPM performance, pre: 9.3 ± 2.3 to post: 22.9 ± 4.2) and COPM satisfaction, pre: 9.9 ± 2.1 to post: 22.7 ± 3.5).

CONCLUSION

Preliminary results suggest low-modest recruitment and high retention rates for the OptiCogs intervention. Changes in cognitive function, fatigue, quality of life, and self-reported occupational performance show improvement from pre- to post-intervention. These potential benefits require further testing in a larger pilot trial.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT05414539.

Defining, quantifying, and reporting intensity, dose, and dosage of neurorehabilitative interventions focusing on motor outcomes

Introduction

Determining the minimal amount of therapy needed for positive neurorehabilitative outcomes is important for optimizing active treatment interventions to improve motor outcomes. However, there are various challenges when quantifying these relationships: first, several consensuses on the definition and usage of the terms intensity, dose, and dosage of motor interventions have been proposed, but there seems to be no agreement, and the terms are still used inconsistently. Second, randomized controlled trials frequently underreport items relevant to determining the intensity, dose, and dosage of the interventions. Third, there is no universal measure to quantify therapy intensity accurately. This "perspectives" paper aims to increase awareness of these topics among neurorehabilitation specialists.

Defining quantifying and reporting

We searched the literature for definitions of intensity, dose, and dosage and adapted the ones we considered the most appropriate to fit the needs of neurorehabilitative interventions. Furthermore, we suggest refining the template for intervention description and replication (TIDieR) to enhance the reporting of randomized controlled trials. Finally, we performed a systematic literature search to provide a list of intensity measures and complemented these with some novel candidate measures.

Discussion

The proposed definitions of intensity, dose, and dosage could improve the communication between neurorehabilitation specialists and the reporting of dose and dosage in interventional studies. Quantifying intensity is necessary to improve our understanding of the minimal intensity, dose, and dosage of therapy needed to improve motor outcomes in neurorehabilitation. We consider the lack of appropriate intensity measures a significant gap in knowledge requiring future research.

CORE-CERT Items as a Minimal Requirement for Replicability of Exercise Interventions: Results From Application to Exercise Studies for Breast Cancer Patients

ABSTRACT

Hacke, C, Knuth, J, Bucher, M, Weisser, B, and Schmidt, T. CORE-CERT items as a minimal requirement for replicability of exercise interventions: results from application to exercise studies for breast cancer patients. J Strength Cond Res XX(X): 000-000, 2022-Exercise interventions have been demonstrated to be useful in the prevention and therapy for multiple different diseases. The Consensus on Exercise Reporting Template (CERT) has been developed as the reporting guideline for exercise studies. The main goals of CERT are to ensure completeness of reporting, to enable interpretation of exercise programs, and to allow extraction of data for meta-analyses and the development of guidelines. However, for clinicians, the most important aspect of good reporting might be the replicability of protocols for their patients. This study was designed to determine the core components of exercise interventions for breast cancer, which are considered as minimal requirement for replicability in practice. The original items of CERT were specified, subdivided, or extended by additional key items to develop a "CORE-CERT checklist." The original CERT and our CORE-CERT were then applied to 29 exercise RCTs for breast cancer obtained from the most frequently cited and most recent meta-analyses in current guidelines. The reporting quality using both templates were examined. Mean original CERT score was 11 of 19 (59%) of completed items and 13 of 19 (68%) of reporting completeness for CORE-CERT. Reporting quality using CORE-CERT items was approximately 8% higher, indicating a more precise description of items in CORE-CERT. Differences concerned exercise dosage, nonexercise components, supervision, and description of each exercise. We propose a novel CORE-CERT guideline necessary for the replicability of exercise interventions in clinical practice. The application of CORE-CERT demonstrated a slightly better but still insufficient reporting quality of exercise interventions for breast cancer.

Reporting dose in complex self-management support interventions for long-term conditions: is it defined by researchers and received by participants? A systematic review

BACKGROUND

The minimum clinically effective dose, and whether this is received in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of complex self-management interventions in long-term conditions (LTCs), can be unclear. The Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist states that dose should be clearly reported to ensure validity and reliable implementation.

OBJECTIVES

To identify whether the expected minimum clinically effective dose, and the dose participants received is reported within research articles and if reporting has improved since the TIDieR checklist was published.

METHODS

Four databases were systematically searched (MEDLINE, PsycINFO, AMED and CINAHL) to identify published reports between 2008 and 2022 for RCTs investigating complex self-management interventions in LTCs. Data on reporting of dose were extracted and synthesised from the eligible articles.

RESULTS

94 articles covering various LTCs including diabetes, stroke and arthritis were included. Most complex interventions involved behaviour change combined with education and/or exercise. The maximum dose was usually reported (n=90; 97.8%), but the expected minimum clinically effective dose and the dose received were reported in only 28 (30.4%) and 62 (67.4%) articles, respectively. Reporting of the expected minimum clinically effective dose and the dose participants received did not improve following the publication of the TIDieR checklist in 2014.

CONCLUSIONS

Interpreting results and implementing effective complex self-management interventions is difficult when researchers' reporting of dose is not in line with guidelines. If trial findings indicate benefit from the intervention, clear reporting of dose ensures reliable implementation to standard care. If the results are non-significant, detailed reporting enables better interpretation of results, that is, differentiating between poor implementation and lack of effectiveness. This ensures quality of interventions and validity and generalisability of trial findings. Therefore, wider adoption of reporting the TIDieR checklist dose aspects is strongly recommended. Alternatively, customised guidelines for reporting dose in complex self-management interventions could be developed.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42020180988.

If exercise is medicine, why don't we know the dose? An overview of systematic reviews assessing reporting quality of exercise interventions in health and disease

OBJECTIVE

To determine how well exercise interventions are reported in trials in health and disease.

DESIGN

Overview of systematic reviews.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus and PsycINFO from inception until June 2021.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Reviews of any health condition were included if they primarily assessed quality of exercise intervention reporting using the Consensus on Exercise Reporting Template (CERT) or the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR). We assessed review quality using a modified version of A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews.

RESULTS

We identified 7804 studies and included 28 systematic reviews. The median (IQR) percentage of CERT and TIDieR items appropriately reported was 24% (19%) and 49% (33%), respectively. TIDieR items 1, Brief name (median=100%, IQR 4) and 2, Why (median=98%, IQR 6), as well as CERT item 4, Supervision and delivery (median=68%, IQR 89), were the best reported. For replication of exercise interventions, TIDieR item 8, When and how much, was moderately well reported (median=62%, IQR 68) although CERT item 8, Description of each exercise to enable replication (median=23%, IQR 44) and item 13, Detailed description of the exercise intervention (median=24%, IQR 66) were poorly reported. Quality of systematic reviews ranged from moderate to critically low quality.

CONCLUSION

Exercise interventions are poorly reported across a range of health conditions. If exercise is medicine, then how it is prescribed and delivered is unclear, potentially limiting its translation from research to practice.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42021261285; Open Science Framework: osf.io/my3ec/.

Application of the Templates TIDieR and CERT Reveal Incomplete Reporting and Poor Replicability of Exercise Interventions for Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

BACKGROUND

Exercise is strongly recommended for the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). However, incomplete intervention reporting in clinical trials limits the replication of exercise protocols. As previously demonstrated by us for exercise and hypertension, the reporting quality might also be insufficient in studies with respect to T2DM and exercise.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to assess the completeness of exercise intervention reporting in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for T2DM.

METHODS

Two independent reviewers applied the Consensus on Exercise Reporting Template (CERT) and the template for intervention description and replication (TIDieR) to 23 exercise trials obtained from the most recent and frequently cited meta-analysis in current guidelines. The completeness of reporting was evaluated, focusing on the F.I.T.T. components (frequency, intensity, time, type). Interrater agreement and associations with publication year and journal impact factor were examined.

RESULTS

Mean CERT score was 11/19 (range 5-17), and 8/12 (range 4-12) for TIDieR. F.I.T.T. components were almost completely described, whereas overall completeness of exercise reporting was 60% and 68% (CERT and TIDieR). Replication of each exercise of the respective program was not possible in 52% of interventions. The majority of items had shown excellent agreement. No associations with publication year or impact factor were found.

CONCLUSION

Exercise interventions were not found to be sufficiently reported in RCTs that currently guide clinical practice in T2DM. Replication in further studies or clinical practice is limited due to poor exercise description. We suggest the use of more specific CERT for reporting results of exercise interventions. Further refinement for internal diseases is needed to better describe exercise interventions.

Who, what, when, where, why, and how: a systematic review of the quality of post-stroke cognitive rehabilitation protocols

BACKGROUND

. Rehabilitation research findings are not routinely incorporated into clinical practice. A key barrier is the quality of reporting in the original study, including who provided the intervention, what it entailed, when and where it occurred, how patient outcomes were monitored, and why the intervention was efficacious.

OBJECTIVES

. To facilitate clinical implementation of post-stroke cognitive rehabilitation research, we undertook a review to examine the quality of intervention reporting in this literature.

METHODS

. Four databases were systematically searched, identifying 27 randomised controlled trials of post-stroke cognitive rehabilitation. The quality of intervention protocol descriptions in each study was independently rated by 2 of the authors using the 12-item Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist.

RESULTS

.Why, when, and where items were reported in more than 70% of interventions, what materials and procedures used was described in 50% to 70%, how items were described in approximately half of the interventions, and who provided interventions was reported in 22% of studies. No study addressed all 12 TIDieR items. "Active ingredients" that may further characterise an intervention and the potential mechanisms of action included restorative training, massed practice, feedback, and tailoring demands (present in approximately 50% of studies).

CONCLUSIONS

. Descriptions of intervention protocols are variable and frequently insufficient, thereby restricting the ability to understand, replicate, and implement evidence-based cognitive rehabilitation. Use of reporting checklists to address this barrier to research translation is a readily achievable and effective means to advance post-stroke care.

Intervention reporting and dissemination of information for the management of hand osteoarthritis

INTRODUCTION

A variety of exercise programs are recognized to be effective for the management of hand osteoarthritis (HOA). It is important to report the essential elements of these exercise programs for clinicians to replicate properly and facilitate their implementation with individuals who suffers from HOA, especially if they are found to be effective programs.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

The objective of this article was to assess content reporting using three exercise reporting standardized assessment tools among exercise interventions randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving individuals with HOA.

STUDY DESIGN

A descriptive study was used.

METHODS

Two pairs of trained assessors independently identified, selected, and scored the reporting quality of the exercise programs of RCTs on the management of HOA using three standardized assessment tools: the Consensus on Exercise Reporting Template (CERT) checklist, Consensus on Therapeutic Exercise Training (CONTENT) scale, and Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist to review the quality of reporting of 11 RCTs included in a recent Ottawa Panel guideline.

RESULTS

Based on consensus reached by two different pairs of reviewers and an arbitrator, the mean total scores for the 11 included exercise programs were reported as follows: the mean total score for the CERT, CONTENT, and TIDieR was 10.58/19 ± 4.34, 3.27/9 ± 1.90, and 5.92/12 ± 2.54, respectively. The overall Pearson's Correlation (r) between the methodological quality and intervention reporting was 0.86, 0.71, and 0.54 for moderate-to-high RCTs and 0.47, 0.79, and 0.42 for fair-to-poor methodological quality for the CERT checklist, CONTENT scale, and TIDieR checklist, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The intervention reporting in the management of HOA is poor among low-, moderate-, and high-quality clinical trials. The least reported information was intervention parameters related to behavior change. Improving reporting is recommended to ensure replication of effective exercise programs to enhance quality of life of individuals with HOA.

Has Reporting on Physical Therapy Interventions Improved in 2 Decades? An Analysis of 140 Trials Reporting on 225 Interventions

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the completeness of reporting of physical therapy interventions in randomized controlled trials before and after publication of the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist (a reporting guideline for interventions).

DESIGN

Meta-research.

METHODS

We searched 6 journals for trials using physical therapy interventions that were published in 2000 and 2018. Two independent assessors scored the TIDieR checklist and extracted descriptive information, including Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scale scores. We identified control or treatment interventions, exercise-based interventions, and area of physical therapy. We performed a descriptive analysis and defined a priori a 20% difference between studies published in 2000 and 2018 as meaningful. We assessed correlations between TIDieR and PEDro scale scores for all interventions.

RESULTS

In total, 140 articles that met selection criteria evaluated 225 interventions (2000, n = 61; 2018, n = 164). Mean ± SD TIDieR score (2000, 7.52 ± 2.62; 2018, 8.26 ± 2.26) did not show a meaningful difference between years for all interventions (+5%), controls (+6%), treatment interventions (+6%), exercise-based interventions (+9%), or musculoskeletal (+4%) or neurological (+7%) physical therapy. For exercise interventions, number of sessions was reported more (+21%) in 2018 than in 2000. For musculoskeletal trials, 2 items were reported more completely in 2018 than in 2000 (materials, +29%; individual versus group, +22%) and 3 items were reported more completely in neurological trials (mode of delivery, +20%, [item 8.1] when +45%, and assessment of fidelity, +20%). The item "Who delivered the intervention?" was reported less completely (-23%) in 2018 than in 2000 in neurological trials. We found no correlation (r = 0.12) between PEDro scale score and TIDieR score.

CONCLUSION

There were few meaningful improvements in how physical therapy interventions were described after publication of the TIDieR reporting guideline. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2021;51(10):503-509. doi:10.2519/jospt.2021.10642.

Comparing the reporting and conduct quality of exercise and pharmacological randomised controlled trials: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

Evaluate the quality of exercise randomised controlled trial (RCT) reporting and conduct in clinical populations (ie, adults with or at risk of chronic conditions) and compare with matched pharmacological RCTs.

DESIGN

Systematic review.

DATA SOURCES

Embase (Elsevier), PubMed (NLM) and CINAHL (EBSCO).

STUDY SELECTION

RCTs of exercise in clinical populations with matching pharmacological RCTs published in leading clinical, medical and specialist journals with impact factors ≥15.

REVIEW METHODS

Overall RCT quality was evaluated by two independent reviewers using three research reporting guidelines (ie, Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT; pharmacological RCTs)/CONSORT for non-pharmacological treatments; exercise RCTs), CONSORT-Harms, Template for Intervention Description and Replication) and two risk of bias assessment (research conduct) tools (ie, Cochrane Risk of Bias, Jadad Scale). We compared research reporting and conduct quality within exercise RCTs with matched pharmacological RCTs, and examined factors associated with quality in exercise and pharmacological RCTs, separately.

FINDINGS

Forty-eight exercise RCTs (11 658 patients; median sample n=138) and 48 matched pharmacological RCTs were evaluated (18 501 patients; median sample n=160). RCTs were conducted primarily in cardiovascular medicine (43%) or oncology (31%). Overall quality score (composite of all research reporting and conduct quality scores; primary endpoint) for exercise RCTs was 58% (median score 46 of 80; IQR: 39-51) compared with 77% (53 of 68; IQR: 47-58) in the matched pharmacological RCTs (p≤0.001). Individual quality scores for trial reporting and conduct were lower in exercise RCTs compared with matched pharmacological RCTs (p≤0.03). Factors associated with higher overall quality scores for exercise RCTs were journal impact factor (≥25), sample size (≥152) and publication year (≥2013).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Research reporting and conduct quality within exercise RCTs is inferior to matched pharmacological RCTs. Suboptimal RCT reporting and conduct impact the fidelity, interpretation, and reproducibility of exercise trials and, ultimately, implementation of exercise in clinical populations.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42018095033.

Intervention reporting of clinical trials published in high-impact cardiology journals: effect of the TIDieR checklist and guide

BACKGROUND

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) provide the highest-level of evidence among primary research in cardiovascular medicine. Yet, even the best trial may be less useful if it fails to provide an accurate means of reproducibility. Unfortunately, discrepancies in the standards of trial reporting have been persistent in previous trials. The Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist aims to improve research efficacy by setting standards for quality intervention reporting and reproducibility. The goal of this study was to assess adherence to the TIDieR checklist among RCTs published in cardiovascular health journals. We also compared the quality of intervention reporting before and after the publication of TIDieR.

METHODS

This cross-sectional, methodological study analysed 101 trials published within high-impact cardiology journals. Our primary objective was to assess overall adherence to the TIDieR checklist. Our secondary objective was to use an interrupted time-series analysis to determine if intervention reporting increased following the publication of TIDieR in March 2014. Additionally, we used generalised estimating equations to identify trial characteristics associated with intervention reporting.

RESULTS

Trials in our sample reported 8.6/12 TIDieR checklist items, on average. The most under-reported items were those for describing the expertise of the interventionists and for describing the location of the intervention.

CONCLUSION

Improved outcome reporting and intervention reproducibility among RCTs are greatly needed in cardiovascular medicine. Clinicians and researchers should advocate for the ethical publication of complete, translatable and replicable clinical research results.

The management of lower back pain using pilates method: assessment of content exercise reporting in RCTs

PURPOSE

To evaluate the quality of the reporting of exercise interventions with Pilates method for the treatment of lower back pain (LBP) in adults.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Two independent evaluators selected randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of moderate and high methodological quality included in a Cochrane Systematic Review (SR) and from an additional updated search in the following databases: CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PEDro and SPORTDiscus. Three assessment tools (Consensus on Therapeutic Exercise Training (CONTENT) scale, Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist and Consensus on Exercise Reporting Template (CERT) checklist) were utilized by three pairs of two independent researchers trained. The scales' concordance was measured using the Kappa coefficient.

RESULTS

Ten RCTs were included. The CONTENT scale score was 5.3 (± 1.33) out of 9 points; the TIDieR checklist was 8.5 (± 1.71) out of 12 points and the CERT checklist was 9.5 (± 3.62) out of 19 points. The CONTENT and CERT had moderate concordance, while there was fair concordance between the other tools.

CONCLUSIONS

The overall reporting quality for the Pilates exercises in ten moderate-to-high quality RTCs for the management of LBP was low according to CONTENT scale and CERT checklist and high according to TIDieR checklist.Implications for RehabilitationReporting of Pilates exercise program in moderate-to-high quality RCTs for the management of lower back pain remains incomplete.Pilates exercise program should be personalized and contextualized to individual participants.There may be a need to consider adding to or combining the information available from various trials.

Argentine tango in the care of Parkinson's disease: A systematic review and analysis of the intervention

OBJECTIVE

To analyse the content of the interventions reported in studies investigating the applicability and efficacy of Argentine tango in participants with Idiopathic Parkinson Disease.

METHODS

Independent reviewers searched databases (PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and PEDro) from their inception to November 2019. Eligible studies were randomised, controlled and uncontrolled clinical trials, and case reports.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

The Template for Intervention Description and Replication guidelines and checklist were used to assess quality and quantity of the content of Argentine tango interventions' description.

RESULTS

We found 21 papers investigating the applicability and efficacy of Argentine tango in participants with Idiopathic Parkinson Disease. Completeness of the reporting of intervention was satisfying. The intervention is intended to affect a variety of aspects of functioning relevant to individuals with Idiopathic Parkinson Disease. Detailed information on the intervention's procedure and dosing is usually provided. The delivery of the Tango dance program was predominantly extensive; however, the intervention has been provided with various approaches and showed to be very adaptable. Attrition- and adherence- rates described are acceptable. The Adapted Tango dance program is the earliest and most researched modality of tango intervention in participants with Idiopathic Parkinson Disease.

CONCLUSIONS

Argentine tango is appropriately described in the studies investigating the applicability and efficacy of the intervention in participants with Idiopathic Parkinson Disease. However, the reporting could be ameliorated.

Assessing the reporting quality of physical activity programs in randomized controlled trials for the management of juvenile idiopathic arthritis using three standardized assessment tools

BACKGROUND

The reporting quality of physical activity (PA) programs in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for the management of juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) remains unknown. This study aimed to assess and compare the reporting quality of PA programs in RCTs for the management of JIA using three difference standardized assessment tools, and to describe the elements that were similar and different between these tools.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted for moderate-to high-quality RCTs of PA programs in JIA, published up until January 2019. Two reviewers independently included 10 RCTs and scored the reporting quality of PA programs using the following tools: Consensus on Exercise Reporting Template (CERT) checklist, Consensus on Therapeutic Exercise Training (CONTENT) scale, and Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist.

RESULTS

Results showed that reporting of PA programs in 10 moderate- to high-quality RCTs for JIA management remains incomplete. The average reporting quality (± standard deviation) for all RCTs combined was moderate for the three standardized assessment tools with 70.8 (±14.3)% for the TIDieR checklist, 53.2 (±20.2)% for the CERT checklist, and 70.0 (±18.9)% for the CONTENT scale. Despite some overlap, the three standardized assessment tools (TIDieR, CERT, CONTENT) included different elements resulting in different scores. All tools assess elements linked to PA programs (provider, location, timing, personalization and adherence), but the CERT checklist includes other essential elements (e.g., additional resources, motivational strategies, adverse events).

CONCLUSIONS

The lack of complete reporting of PA programs in RCTs for the management of JIA and the variation in scores and assessed elements among standardized assessment tools show the need to improve reporting. Using the most comprehensive standardized tool (i.e., the CERT) and providing accessible supplemental information on PA programs may improve the reporting quality of PA programs in RCTs and help reproduce PA programs in research and clinical practice.