1
|
McGrath A, McHale S, Hanson CL, McLelland C, Hamilton DF. Completeness of intervention reporting in randomised trials of technology-enabled remote or hybrid exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation: a systematic review using the TIDieR framework. Disabil Rehabil 2024; 46:4350-4358. [PMID: 37899659 DOI: 10.1080/09638288.2023.2274887] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/07/2023] [Revised: 10/12/2023] [Accepted: 10/19/2023] [Indexed: 10/31/2023]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Aoife McGrath
- School of Health and Social Care, Edinburgh Napier University, Edinburgh, UK
| | - Sheona McHale
- School of Health and Social Care, Edinburgh Napier University, Edinburgh, UK
| | - Coral L Hanson
- School of Health and Social Care, Edinburgh Napier University, Edinburgh, UK
| | - Colin McLelland
- School of Health and Social Care, Edinburgh Napier University, Edinburgh, UK
- MAHD National Sports Academy, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
| | - David F Hamilton
- Research Centre for Health, Glasgow Caledonian University, Glasgow, UK
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Conrado Ignacio A, Oliveira NL, Xavier Neves da Silva L, Feter J, De Nardi AT, Helal L, Rodrigues dos Santos M, Soares DDS, Morgana Galliano L, Alano TS, Umpierre D. Methodological rigor and quality of reporting of clinical trials published with physical activity interventions: A report from the Strengthening the Evidence in Exercise Sciences Initiative (SEES Initiative). PLoS One 2024; 19:e0309087. [PMID: 39213281 PMCID: PMC11364220 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0309087] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/12/2024] [Accepted: 08/05/2024] [Indexed: 09/04/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND This study addresses the need for improved transparency and reproducibility in randomized clinical trials (RCTs) within the field of physical activity (PA) interventions. Despite efforts to promote these practices, there is limited evidence on the adherence to established reporting and methodological standards in published RCTs. The research, part of the Strengthening the Evidence in Exercise Sciences Initiative (SEES Initiative) in 2020, assessed the methodological standards and reporting quality of RCTs focusing on PA interventions. METHODS RCTs of PA advice or exercise interventions published in 2020 were selected. Monthly searches were conducted on PubMed/MEDLINE targeting six top-tier exercise science journals. Assessments were conducted by two independent authors, based on 44 items originally from CONSORT and TIDieR reporting guidelines. These items were divided into seven domains: transparency, completeness, participants, intervention, rigor methodology, outcomes and critical analysis. Descriptive analysis was performed using absolute and relative frequencies, and exploratory analysis was done by comparing proportions using the χ2 test (α = 0.05). RESULTS Out of 1,766 RCTs evaluated for eligibility, 53 were included. The median adherence to recommended items across the studies was 30 (18-44) items in individual assessments. Notably, items demonstrating full adherence were related to intervention description, justification, outcome measurement, effect sizes, and statistical analysis. Conversely, the least reported item pertained to mentioning unplanned modifications during trials, appearing in only 11.3% of studies. Among the 53 RCTs, 67.9% reported having a registration, and these registered studies showed higher adherence to assessed items compared to non-registered ones. CONCLUSIONS In summary, while critical analysis aspects were more comprehensively described, aspects associated with transparency, such as protocol registrations/modifications and intervention descriptions, were reported suboptimally. The findings underscore the importance of promoting resources related to reporting quality and transparent research practices for investigators and editors in the exercise sciences discipline.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Andresa Conrado Ignacio
- LADD Lab, Centro de Pesquisa Clínica, Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil
- Postgraduate Program in Health Sciences (Cardiology and Cardiovascular Sciences), Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil
| | - Nórton Luís Oliveira
- National Institute of Science and Technology for Health Technology Assessment (IATS/HCPA), Centro de Pesquisa Clínica, Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil
- LADD Lab, Centro de Pesquisa Clínica, Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil
| | - Larissa Xavier Neves da Silva
- LADD Lab, Centro de Pesquisa Clínica, Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil
- Postgraduate Program in Health Sciences (Cardiology and Cardiovascular Sciences), Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil
| | - Jayne Feter
- LADD Lab, Centro de Pesquisa Clínica, Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil
- Postgraduate Program in Health Sciences (Cardiology and Cardiovascular Sciences), Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil
| | - Angélica Trevisan De Nardi
- LADD Lab, Centro de Pesquisa Clínica, Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil
- Postgraduate Program in Health Sciences (Cardiology and Cardiovascular Sciences), Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil
| | - Lucas Helal
- LADD Lab, Centro de Pesquisa Clínica, Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil
- Postgraduate Program in Health Sciences (Cardiology and Cardiovascular Sciences), Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil
| | | | - Douglas dos Santos Soares
- LADD Lab, Centro de Pesquisa Clínica, Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil
- Postgraduate Program in Health Sciences (Cardiology and Cardiovascular Sciences), Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil
| | - Leony Morgana Galliano
- Department of Public Health, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil
- Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte, Natal, Brazil
| | - Tainá Silveira Alano
- LADD Lab, Centro de Pesquisa Clínica, Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil
- Medical graduate program, Universidade Federal de Ciências da Saúde de Porto Alegre (UFCSPA), Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil
| | - Daniel Umpierre
- Department of Public Health, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil
- National Institute of Science and Technology for Health Technology Assessment (IATS/HCPA), Centro de Pesquisa Clínica, Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil
- LADD Lab, Centro de Pesquisa Clínica, Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Gogovor A, Zomahoun HTV, Ben Charif A, Ekanmian G, Moher D, McLean RKD, Milat A, Wolfenden L, Prévost K, Aubin E, Rochon P, Rheault N, Légaré F. Informing the development of the SUCCEED reporting guideline for studies on the scaling of health interventions: A systematic review. Medicine (Baltimore) 2024; 103:e37079. [PMID: 38363902 PMCID: PMC10869056 DOI: 10.1097/md.0000000000037079] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/07/2023] [Accepted: 01/05/2024] [Indexed: 02/18/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Quality reporting contributes to effective translation of health research in practice and policy. As an initial step in the development of a reporting guideline for scaling, the Standards for reporting stUdies of sCaling evidenCEd-informED interventions (SUCCEED), we performed a systematic review to identify relevant guidelines and compile a list of potential items. METHODS We conducted a systematic review according to Cochrane method guidelines. We searched the following databases: MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Web of Science, from their respective inceptions. We also searched websites of relevant organizations and Google. We included any document that provided instructions or recommendations, e.g., reporting guideline, checklist, guidance, framework, standard; could inform the design or reporting of scaling interventions; and related to the health sector. We extracted characteristics of the included guidelines and assessed their methodological quality using a 3-item internal validity assessment tool. We extracted all items from the guidelines and classified them according to the main sections of reporting guidelines (title, abstract, introduction, methods, results, discussion and other information). We performed a narrative synthesis based on descriptive statistics. RESULTS Of 7704 records screened (published between 1999 and 2019), we included 39 guidelines, from which data were extracted from 57 reports. Of the 39 guidelines, 17 were for designing scaling interventions and 22 for reporting implementation interventions. At least one female author was listed in 31 guidelines, and 21 first authors were female. None of the authors belonged to the patient stakeholder group. Only one guideline clearly identified a patient as having participated in the consensus process. More than half the guidelines (56%) had been developed using an evidence-based process. In total, 750 items were extracted from the 39 guidelines and distributed into the 7 main sections. CONCLUSION Relevant items identified could inform the development of a reporting guideline for scaling studies of evidence-based health interventions. This and our assessment of guidelines could contribute to better reporting in the science and practice of scaling.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Amédé Gogovor
- VITAM – Centre de recherche en santé durable, Centre intégré universitaire de santé et services sociaux de la Capitale-Nationale, Quebec City, QC
- Department of Family Medicine and Emergency Medicine, Université Laval, Quebec City, QC
| | | | | | - Giraud Ekanmian
- Department of Social and Preventive Medicine, Université Laval, Quebec City, QC
| | - David Moher
- Ottawa Methods Centre, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, The Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, ON
- School of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON
| | - Robert K. D. McLean
- International Development Research Centre, Ottawa, ON
- Integrated Knowledge Translation Research Network, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, ON
| | - Andrew Milat
- School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Camperdown, NSW
| | - Luke Wolfenden
- School of Medicine and Public Health, The University of Newcastle, Newcastle, NSW
- The National Centre of Implementation Science, The University of Newcastle, Newcastle, NSW
| | | | | | - Paula Rochon
- Women’s Age Lab, Women’s College Hospital, Toronto, ON
- Department of Medicine and Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON
| | | | - France Légaré
- VITAM – Centre de recherche en santé durable, Centre intégré universitaire de santé et services sociaux de la Capitale-Nationale, Quebec City, QC
- Department of Family Medicine and Emergency Medicine, Université Laval, Quebec City, QC
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Lišnić V, Ashraf H, Viđak M, Marušić A. Completeness of intervention description in invasive cardiology trials: an observational study of ClinicalTrials.gov registry and corresponding publications. Front Med (Lausanne) 2023; 10:1276847. [PMID: 37881632 PMCID: PMC10597631 DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2023.1276847] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/15/2023] [Accepted: 09/19/2023] [Indexed: 10/27/2023] Open
Abstract
Introduction Non-pharmacological invasive interventions in cardiology are complex and often inadequately reported. Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist and guide were developed to aid reporting and assessment of non-pharmacological interventions. The aim of our study was to assess the completeness of describing invasive cardiology interventions in clinical trials at the level of trial registration and corresponding journal article publication. Methodology We searched for clinical trials in invasive cardiology registered in Clinicaltrials.gov and corresponding journal publications. We used the 10-item TIDieR checklist for registries and 12-item checklist for journal publications. Results Out of 7,017 registry items retrieved by our search, 301 items were included in the analysis. The search for corresponding published articles yielded 192 journal publications. The majority of trials were funded by the industry and were medical device trials. The median number of reported TIDieR items was 4.5 (95% CI 4.49-4.51) out of 10, and while the corresponding journal articles reported 6.5 (95% CI 6.0-6.5) out of 12 TIDieR items. Conclusion Registration and reporting of invasive cardiology trials is often incomplete and adequate detailed description of the interventions is not provided. TIDieR checklist is an important tool which should be used to ensure rigorous reporting of non-pharmacological interventions in cardiology.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Viktoria Lišnić
- Department of Cardiology, University Hospital of Split, Split, Croatia
| | - Hishaam Ashraf
- Wirral University Teaching Hospital, Wirral, United Kingdom
| | - Marin Viđak
- Department of Research in Biomedicine and Health, Center for Evidence-Based Medicine, University of Split School of Medicine, Split, Croatia
- Department of Cardiology, Dubrava University Hospital, Zagreb, Croatia
| | - Ana Marušić
- Department of Research in Biomedicine and Health, Center for Evidence-Based Medicine, University of Split School of Medicine, Split, Croatia
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Pfledderer CD, von Klinggraeff L, Burkart S, da Silva Bandeira A, Armstrong B, Weaver RG, Adams EL, Beets MW. Use of guidelines, checklists, frameworks, and recommendations in behavioral intervention preliminary studies and associations with reporting comprehensiveness: a scoping bibliometric review. Pilot Feasibility Stud 2023; 9:161. [PMID: 37705118 PMCID: PMC10498529 DOI: 10.1186/s40814-023-01389-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/17/2022] [Accepted: 08/29/2023] [Indexed: 09/15/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Guidelines, checklists, frameworks, and recommendations (GCFRs) related to preliminary studies serve as essential resources to assist behavioral intervention researchers in reporting findings from preliminary studies, but their impact on preliminary study reporting comprehensiveness is unknown. The purpose of this study was to conduct a scoping bibliometric review of recently published preliminary behavioral-focused intervention studies to (1) examine the prevalence of GCFR usage and (2) determine the associations between GCFR usage and reporting feasibility-related characteristics. METHODS A systematic search was conducted for preliminary studies of behavioral-focused interventions published between 2018 and 2020. Studies were limited to the top 25 journals publishing behavioral-focused interventions, text mined to identify usage of GCFRs, and categorized as either not citing GCFRs or citing ≥ 2 GCFRs (Citers). A random sample of non-Citers was text mined to identify studies which cited other preliminary studies that cited GCFRs (Indirect Citers) and those that did not (Never Citers). The presence/absence of feasibility-related characteristics was compared between Citers, Indirect Citers, and Never Citers via univariate logistic regression. RESULTS Studies (n = 4143) were identified, and 1316 were text mined to identify GCFR usage (n = 167 Citers). A random sample of 200 studies not citing a GCFR were selected and categorized into Indirect Citers (n = 71) and Never Citers (n = 129). Compared to Never Citers, Citers had higher odds of reporting retention, acceptability, adverse events, compliance, cost, data collection feasibility, and treatment fidelity (ORrange = 2.62-14.15, p < 0.005). Citers also had higher odds of mentioning feasibility in purpose statements, providing progression criteria, framing feasibility as the primary outcome, and mentioning feasibility in conclusions (ORrange = 6.31-17.04, p < 0.005) and lower odds of mentioning efficacy in purpose statements, testing for efficacy, mentioning efficacy in conclusions, and suggesting future testing (ORrange = 0.13-0.54, p < 0.05). Indirect Citers had higher odds of reporting acceptability and treatment fidelity (ORrange = 2.12-2.39, p < 0.05) but lower odds of testing for efficacy (OR = 0.36, p < 0.05) compared to Never Citers. CONCLUSION The citation of GCFRs is associated with greater reporting of feasibility-related characteristics in preliminary studies of behavioral-focused interventions. Researchers are encouraged to use and cite literature that provides guidance on design, implementation, analysis, and reporting to improve the comprehensiveness of reporting for preliminary studies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Christopher D Pfledderer
- Department of Health Promotion and Behavioral Sciences, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, School of Public Health Austin Campus, Austin, TX, 78701, USA.
| | - Lauren von Klinggraeff
- Arnold School of Public Health, University of South Carolina, 921 Assembly Street, Columbia, SC, 29205, USA
| | - Sarah Burkart
- Arnold School of Public Health, University of South Carolina, 921 Assembly Street, Columbia, SC, 29205, USA
| | | | - Bridget Armstrong
- Arnold School of Public Health, University of South Carolina, 921 Assembly Street, Columbia, SC, 29205, USA
| | - R Glenn Weaver
- Arnold School of Public Health, University of South Carolina, 921 Assembly Street, Columbia, SC, 29205, USA
| | - Elizabeth L Adams
- Arnold School of Public Health, University of South Carolina, 921 Assembly Street, Columbia, SC, 29205, USA
| | - Michael W Beets
- Arnold School of Public Health, University of South Carolina, 921 Assembly Street, Columbia, SC, 29205, USA
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Stazić P, Jurić D, Turić A, Šošić A, Marušić A, Roguljić M. Reporting characteristics of nonsurgical periodontal therapy trials registered in ClinicalTrials.gov: an observational study. J Comp Eff Res 2023; 12:e230058. [PMID: 37418255 PMCID: PMC10508296 DOI: 10.57264/cer-2023-0058] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/19/2023] [Accepted: 06/27/2023] [Indexed: 07/08/2023] Open
Abstract
Aim: To evaluate the completeness of the description of nonsurgical periodontal therapy interventions in clinical trials registered in ClinicalTrials.gov and correspondence of registered information for trial participants and outcome measures with published articles. Materials & methods: We retrieved data from ClinicalTrials.gov and corresponding publications. The completeness of intervention reporting was assessed using the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist for oral hygiene instructions (OHI), professional mechanical plaque removal (PMPR), and subgingival instrumentation, antiseptics and antibiotics. The completeness of registration of trial protocol information was assessed according to the WHO Trial Registration DataSet for participant information (enrollment, sample size calculation, age, gender, condition) and primary/secondary outcome measures. Results: 79 included trials involved OHI (n = 38 trials, 48.1%), PMPR (n = 19, 24.1%), antiseptics (n = 11, 12.7%), or antibiotics (n = 11, 12.7%). There was a great variety in the terms used to describe these interventions. Most of the analyzed trials (93.7%) were completed and did not provide any data on study phase (74.7%). The description of intervention in the registry in ClinicalTrials.gov was inadequate for all analyzed interventions, with description inconsistencies in matching publications. There were also discrepancies in registered and published outcomes: for 39 trials with published results, 18 had different registered and reported primary outcomes, and 29 different registered and reported secondary outcomes. Conclusion: The completeness of the description of nonsurgical therapy of periodontitis in clinical trials is unsatisfactory, reducing the quality of translation of the new evidence and procedures into clinical practice. Significant discrepancy in registered and reported trial outcomes calls into question the validity of reported results and relevance for practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Petra Stazić
- University of Split School of Medicine, Šoltanska 2, Split, 21000, Croatia
| | - Diana Jurić
- University of Split School of Medicine, Šoltanska 2, Split, 21000, Croatia
| | - Antonela Turić
- University of Split School of Medicine, Šoltanska 2, Split, 21000, Croatia
| | - Antonio Šošić
- University of Split School of Medicine, Šoltanska 2, Split, 21000, Croatia
| | - Ana Marušić
- University of Split School of Medicine, Šoltanska 2, Split, 21000, Croatia
| | - Marija Roguljić
- University of Split School of Medicine, Šoltanska 2, Split, 21000, Croatia
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
McErlean M, Samways J, Godolphin PJ, Chen Y. The reporting standards of randomised controlled trials in leading medical journals between 2019 and 2020: a systematic review. Ir J Med Sci 2023; 192:73-80. [PMID: 35237908 PMCID: PMC8890950 DOI: 10.1007/s11845-022-02955-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/25/2021] [Accepted: 02/09/2022] [Indexed: 02/04/2023]
Abstract
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are the gold standard study design used to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of healthcare interventions. The reporting quality of RCTs is of fundamental importance for readers to appropriately analyse and understand the design and results of studies which are often labelled as practice changing papers. The aim of this article is to assess the reporting standards of a representative sample of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published between 2019 and 2020 in four of the highest impact factor general medical journals. A systematic review of the electronic database Medline was conducted. Eligible RCTs included those published in the New England Journal of Medicine, Lancet, Journal of the American Medical Association, and British Medical Journal between January 1, 2019, and June 9, 2020. The study protocol was registered on medRxiv ( https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.07.06.20147074 ). Of a total eligible sample of 497 studies, 50 full-text RCTs were reviewed against the CONSORT 2010 statement and relevant extensions where necessary. The mean adherence to the CONSORT checklist was 90% (SD 9%). There were specific items on the CONSORT checklist which had recurring suboptimal adherence, including in title (item 1a, 70% adherence), randomisation (items 9 and 10, 56% and 30% adherence) and outcomes and estimation (item 17b, 62% adherence). Amongst a sample of RCTs published in four of the highest impact factor general medical journals, there was good overall adherence to the CONSORT 2010 statement. However there remains significant room for improvement in areas such as description of allocation concealment and implementation of randomisation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Jack Samways
- grid.439803.5Cardiology Department, London North West University Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - Peter J. Godolphin
- grid.83440.3b0000000121901201MRC Clinical Trials Unit at University College London, Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, University College London, London, UK
| | - Yang Chen
- Institute of Health Informatics, University College London, 222 Euston Road, London, NW1 2DA, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Rookes TA, Barat A, Turner R, Taylor S. Reporting dose in complex self-management support interventions for long-term conditions: is it defined by researchers and received by participants? A systematic review. BMJ Open 2022; 12:e056532. [PMID: 35977763 PMCID: PMC9389087 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-056532] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/24/2021] [Accepted: 07/22/2022] [Indexed: 11/04/2022] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Atena Barat
- Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - Rebecca Turner
- Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, UCL, London, UK
| | - Stephanie Taylor
- Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Lee YS, Kim SY, Kim M, Kim M, Won J, Lee H, Lee MS, Chae Y. Reporting quality of sham needles used as controls in acupuncture trials: a methodological evaluation. Chin Med 2022; 17:64. [PMID: 35637519 PMCID: PMC9153153 DOI: 10.1186/s13020-022-00608-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/09/2021] [Accepted: 04/10/2022] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The description of controls is important in acupuncture clinical trials to interpret its effectiveness without fallacy. This paper aims to evaluate the reporting quality of acupuncture studies on the characteristics of sham needles. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING Using a checklist developed from previously published reporting guidelines, the distribution of reported items and changes of reporting rates over time were investigated. Two-way ANOVA and linear regression were conducted. RESULTS Original articles of RCTs of any design involving sham needles as controls were eligible for assessment. 117 trials from three 2-year time periods between 2009 and 2018 were included. Seven items out of 25 were reported in more than 50% of the studies. While significant differences of reporting scores among categories were observed, there were no significant differences among time periods; no significant improvement was observed over time. CONCLUSIONS Low reporting qualities of sham needles used in acupuncture studies may influence how researchers understand the effectiveness of acupuncture. This study evaluated previous publications from 2009 to 2018 and found that reporting qualities on sham needles did not improve over time. Further studies are required to validate the items used in this study to endorse better reporting of controls in acupuncture trials.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ye-Seul Lee
- Jaseng Spine and Joint Research Institute, Jaseng Medical Foundation, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Song-Yi Kim
- Department of Anatomy and Acupoint, College of Korean Medicine, Gachon University, Seongnam, Republic of Korea
| | - Mariah Kim
- Department of Internal Medicine, Korean Medicine Hospital of Pusan National University, Yangsan, South Korea
| | - Minseo Kim
- Department of Anatomy and Acupoint, College of Korean Medicine, Gachon University, Seongnam, Republic of Korea
| | - Jiyoon Won
- KM Science Research Division, Korea Institute of Oriental Medicine, Daejeon, South Korea
| | - Hyangsook Lee
- Department of Science in Korean Medicine, College of Korean Medicine, Graduate School, Kyung Hee University, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Myeong Soo Lee
- KM Science Research Division, Korea Institute of Oriental Medicine, Daejeon, South Korea
| | - Younbyoung Chae
- Acupuncture and Meridian Science Research Center, College of Korean Medicine, Kyung Hee University, 1 Hoegi-dong, Dongdaemun-gu, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Hacke C, Schreiber J, Weisser B. Application of the Templates TIDieR and CERT Reveal Incomplete Reporting and Poor Replicability of Exercise Interventions for Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus. Curr Diabetes Rev 2022; 18:e250821195838. [PMID: 34433402 DOI: 10.2174/1871525719666210825150957] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/31/2021] [Revised: 06/16/2021] [Accepted: 07/16/2021] [Indexed: 11/22/2022]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Claudia Hacke
- Department of Sports Medicine, Institute of Sports Science, Christian-Albrechts-University Kiel, Kiel, Germany
| | - Janika Schreiber
- Department of Sports Medicine, Institute of Sports Science, Christian-Albrechts-University Kiel, Kiel, Germany
| | - Burkhard Weisser
- Department of Sports Medicine, Institute of Sports Science, Christian-Albrechts-University Kiel, Kiel, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Rauh SL, Turner D, Jellison S, Allison DB, Fugate C, Foote G, Vassar M. Completeness of Intervention Reporting of Clinical Trials Published in Highly Ranked Obesity Journals. Obesity (Silver Spring) 2021; 29:285-293. [PMID: 33340283 DOI: 10.1002/oby.23054] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/24/2020] [Revised: 08/18/2020] [Accepted: 09/02/2020] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) play a crucial role in the research and advancement of medical treatment. A cross-sectional study design was utilized to analyze the completeness of intervention reporting using the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist and to evaluate factors associated with intervention reporting. A comparison of the completeness of intervention reporting before and after the publication of TIDieR was sought. METHODS PubMed was searched for RCTs in the top 10 obesity journals per the Google h5-index. After excluding non-RCTs, 300 articles were randomly sampled. After assessing each publication for eligibility, two authors (SLR and DT) extracted data related to intervention reporting from records in an independent, masked fashion. Data were then verified and analyzed. RESULTS The analysis revealed that the quality of intervention reporting is quite variable. Overall, no statistically significant difference in the quality of intervention reporting before and after the release of TIDieR guidelines was found. In general, obesity research has good intervention reporting in areas such as the mode of delivery, material lists for intervention, and procedure lists. However, four main areas in which obesity researchers can improve reporting quality were determined. These include providing the expertise and background of intervention providers and providing statements regarding the assessment of fidelity of the intervention. CONCLUSIONS Urgent intervention is warranted to improve the quality of research reporting in obesity research, which is a fundamental component of obesity management. This will likely require a unified approach from researchers, journals, and funding sources.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shelby Lynn Rauh
- Oklahoma State University Center for Health Sciences, Tulsa, Oklahoma, USA
| | - D'Arcy Turner
- Kansas City University of Medicine and Biosciences, Joplin, Missouri, USA
| | - Sam Jellison
- Oklahoma State University Center for Health Sciences, Tulsa, Oklahoma, USA
| | - David B Allison
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Indiana University School of Public Health, Bloomington, Indiana, USA
| | - Colony Fugate
- Oklahoma State University Center for Health Sciences, Tulsa, Oklahoma, USA
| | - Greyson Foote
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Indiana University School of Public Health, Bloomington, Indiana, USA
| | - Matt Vassar
- Oklahoma State University Center for Health Sciences, Tulsa, Oklahoma, USA
| |
Collapse
|