4.6 Article

The completeness of intervention descriptions in published National Institute of Health Research HTAfunded trials: a cross-sectional study

Journal

BMJ OPEN
Volume 4, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2013-003713

Keywords

AUDIT; STATISTICS & RESEARCH METHODS

Funding

  1. NIHR Evaluation, Trials and Studies Coordinating Centre through its Research on Research Programme

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objectives The objective of this study was to assess whether National Institute of Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment (HTA)-funded randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published in the HTA journal were described in sufficient detail to replicate in practice. Setting RCTs published in the HTA journal. Participants 98 RCTs published in the HTA journal up to March 2011. Completeness of the intervention description was assessed independently by two researchers using a checklist, which included assessments of participants, intensity, schedule, materials and settings. Disagreements in scoring were discussed in the team; differences were then explored and resolved. Primary and secondary outcome measures Proportion of trials rated as having a complete description of the intervention (primary outcome measure). The proportion of drug trials versus psychological and non-drug trials rated as having a complete description of the intervention (secondary outcome measures). Results Components of the intervention description were missing in 68/98 (69.4%) reports. Baseline characteristics and descriptions of settings had the highest levels of completeness with over 90% of reports complete. Reports were less complete on patient information with 58.2% of the journals having an adequate description. When looking at individual intervention types, drug intervention descriptions were more complete than non-drug interventions with 33.3% and 30.6% levels of completeness, respectively, although this was not significant statistically. Only 27.3% of RCTs with psychological interventions were deemed to be complete, although again these differences were not significant statistically. Conclusions Ensuring the replicability of study interventions is an essential part of adding value in research. All those publishing clinical trial data need to ensure transparency and completeness in the reporting of interventions to ensure that study interventions can be replicated.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

Article Health Care Sciences & Services

Clinical trial metadata: defining and extracting metadata on the design, conduct, results and costs of 125 randomised clinical trials funded by the National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme

James Raftery, Amanda Young, Louise Stanton, Ruairidh Milne, Andrew Cook, David Turner, Peter Davidson

HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT (2015)

Meeting Abstract Medicine, Research & Experimental

Pilot and feasibility studies: what's the point?

Wei Pek, Martin Ashton-Key, Emma Kirkpatrick, Amanda Young

TRIALS (2015)

Editorial Material Endocrinology & Metabolism

Web-Based Management Trial of Diabetes Care

Katharine D. Barnard, Amanda Blatch-Jones

DIABETES TECHNOLOGY & THERAPEUTICS (2016)

Article Health Care Sciences & Services

Models and applications for measuring the impact of health research: update of a systematic review for the Health Technology Assessment programme

James Raftery, Steve Hanney, Trish Greenhalgh, Matthew Glover, Amanda Blatch-Jones

HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT (2016)

Article Medicine, Research & Experimental

National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Programme research funding and UK burden of disease

Fay Chinnery, Gemma Bashevoy, Amanda Blatch-Jones, Lisa Douet, Sarah Puddicombe, James Raftery

TRIALS (2018)

Article Medicine, Research & Experimental

Identifying trial recruitment uncertainties using a James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership - the PRioRiTy (Prioritising Recruitment in Randomised Trials) study

Patricia Healy, Sandra Galvin, Paula R. Williamson, Shaun Treweek, Caroline Whiting, Beccy Maeso, Christopher Bray, Peter Brocklehurst, Mary Clarke Moloney, Abdel Douiri, Carrol Gamble, Heidi R. Gardner, Derick Mitchell, Derek Stewart, Joan Jordan, Martin O'Donnell, Mike Clarke, Sue H. Pavitt, Eleanor Woodford Guegan, Amanda Blatch-Jones, Valerie Smith, Hannah Reay, Declan Devane

TRIALS (2018)

Article Medicine, General & Internal

Role of feasibility and pilot studies in randomised controlled trials: a cross-sectional study

Amanda Jane Blatch-Jones, Wei Pek, Emma Kirkpatrick, Martin Ashton-Key

BMJ OPEN (2018)

Article Nursing

The impact of COVID-19 on nurses (ICON) survey: Nurses' accounts of what would have helped to improve their working lives

Jane Ball, Sydney Anstee, Keith Couper, Jill Maben, Holly Blake, Janet E. Anderson, Daniel Kelly, Ruth Harris, Anna Conolly

Summary: This study analyzed nurses' responses to a survey on what could have improved their working lives during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK. The results identified key areas for improvement, including the provision of personal protective equipment, support for the workforce, and better communication. The findings highlight the importance of addressing these issues to ensure the safety and well-being of nurses and to prevent negative long-term impacts on their retention.

JOURNAL OF ADVANCED NURSING (2023)

Review Public, Environmental & Occupational Health

Evidence for behavioural interventions addressing condom use fit and feel issues to improve condom use: a systematic review

Sydney Anstee, Jonathan Shepherd, Cynthia A. Graham, Nicole Stone, Katherine Brown, Katie Newby, Roger Ingham

SEXUAL HEALTH (2019)

Meeting Abstract Medicine, Research & Experimental

User-focused research to identify the benefits of digital tools for the recruitment and retention in trials: A qualitative study

Amanda Jane Blatch-Jones, Abby Bull, Jacqui Nuttall, Gareth Griffiths, Jeremy Wyatt

TRIALS (2019)

Meeting Abstract Medicine, Research & Experimental

Digital Tools for More Efficient Conduct of RCTs: Trials Unit Survey

Jacqueline Nuttall, Athene Lane, Amanda Blatch-Jones, Gareth Griffiths, Jermey Wyatt

TRIALS (2019)

Meeting Abstract Medicine, Research & Experimental

Key design features of pilot and feasibility studies to inform successful surgical trials: a systematic analysis of funded studies

Katherine Fairhurst, Jane Blazeby, Shelley Potter, Amanda Blatch-Jones, Ceri Rowlands, Carrol Gamble, Kerry Avery

TRIALS (2017)

Article Health Policy & Services

The impact on healthcare, policy and practice from 36 multi-project research programmes: findings from two reviews

Steve Hanney, Trisha Greenhalgh, Amanda Blatch-Jones, Matthew Glover, James Raftery

HEALTH RESEARCH POLICY AND SYSTEMS (2017)

Meeting Abstract Endocrinology & Metabolism

ADULTS WITH T1DM: EXPECTATIONS OF CLOSED LOOP TECHNOLOGY PRIOR TO PARTICIPATION IN 3 MONTH 24 HOUR 'FREE LIVING' TRIAL

K. Barnard, A. J. Young, T. Pieber, S. Arnolds, H. Thabit, R. Hovorka

DIABETES TECHNOLOGY & THERAPEUTICS (2015)

Meeting Abstract Medicine, Research & Experimental

How are systematic reviews used in the planning and design of health technology assessment funded trials?

Sheetal Bhurke, Andrew Cook, Anna Tallant, Amanda Young, Elaine Williams, James Raftery

TRIALS (2015)

No Data Available