Consensus Statement for Protocols of Factorial Randomized Trials

Author:

Kahan Brennan C.1,Hall Sophie S.2,Beller Elaine M.3,Birchenall Megan2,Elbourne Diana4,Juszczak Edmund2,Little Paul5,Fletcher John6,Golub Robert M.7,Goulao Beatriz8,Hopewell Sally9,Islam Nazrul56,Zwarenstein Merrick10,Chan An-Wen11,Montgomery Alan A.2

Affiliation:

1. MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, London, United Kingdom

2. Nottingham Clinical Trials Unit, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom

3. Institute for Evidence-Based Healthcare, Bond University, Robina, Australia

4. London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom

5. Primary Care Research Centre, School of Primary Care, Population Sciences and Medical Education, Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, United Kingdom

6. The BMJ, London, United Kingdom

7. Department of Medicine, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois

8. Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, Scotland

9. Oxford Clinical Trials Research Unit, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom

10. Centre For Studies in Family Medicine, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, Western University, London, Canada

11. Women’s College Research Institute, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada

Abstract

ImportanceTrial protocols outline a trial’s objectives as well as the methods (design, conduct, and analysis) that will be used to meet those objectives, and transparent reporting of trial protocols ensures objectives are clear and facilitates appraisal regarding the suitability of study methods. Factorial trials, in which 2 or more interventions are assessed in the same set of participants, have unique methodological considerations. However, no extension of the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials (SPIRIT) 2013 Statement, which provides guidance on reporting of trial protocols, for factorial trials is available.ObjectiveTo develop a consensus-based extension to the SPIRIT 2013 Statement for factorial trials.Evidence ReviewThe SPIRIT extension for factorial trials was developed using the Enhancing the Quality and Transparency of Health Research (EQUATOR) methodological framework. First, a list of reporting recommendations was generated using a scoping review of methodological articles identified using a MEDLINE search (inception to May 2019), which was supplemented with relevant articles from the personal collections of the authors. Second, a 3-round Delphi survey (January to June 2022, completed by 104 panelists from 14 countries) was conducted to assess the importance of items and identify additional recommendations. Third, a hybrid consensus meeting was held, attended by 15 panelists to finalize selection and wording of the checklist.FindingsThis SPIRIT extension for factorial trials modified 9 of the 33 items in the SPIRIT 2013 checklist. Key reporting recommendations were that the rationale for using a factorial design should be provided, including whether an interaction is hypothesized; the treatment groups that will form the main comparisons should be identified; and statistical methods for each main comparison should be provided, including how interactions will be assessed.Conclusions and RelevanceIn this consensus statement, 9 factorial-specific items were provided that should be addressed in all protocols of factorial trials to increase the trial’s utility and transparency.

Publisher

American Medical Association (AMA)

Subject

General Medicine

Cited by 4 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3