Dataset Information

The Template for Intervention Description and Replication as a Measure of Intervention Reporting Quality: Rasch Analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To determine whether the 12 items of the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) can be combined into a single summary score reflecting intervention reporting completeness and quality.

Design

Systematic review and reanalysis of published data. After a systematic search of the published literature, 16 review articles were retrieved with 489 sets of 12 TIDieR ratings of experimental intervention, comparator, or the 2 combined as reported in primary studies. These 489 sets were recoded into a common format and analyzed using Rasch analysis for binary items.

Setting

Not applicable.

Participants

Not applicable.

Interventions

Not applicable.

Main outcome measures

Psychometric qualities of a Rasch Analysis-based TIDieR summary score.

Results

The data fit the Rasch model. Infit and outfit values were generally acceptable (range, 0.70-1.45). TIDieR was reasonably unidimensional in its structure. However, the person (here: study) separation ratio was 1.25 with a corresponding reliability of 0.61. In addition, the confidence interval around each estimate of reporting completeness was wide (model standard error of 0.78).

Conclusion

Several Rasch indicators suggested that TIDieR is not a strong instrument for assessing the quality of a researcher's reporting on an intervention. It is recommended that it be used with caution. Improvements in TIDieR itself may make it more helpful as a reporting tool.

SUBMITTER: Dijkers MP

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7853349 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The Template for Intervention Description and Replication as a Measure of Intervention Reporting Quality: Rasch Analysis.

Dijkers Marcel P MP Millis Scott R SR

Archives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation 20200423 3

<h4>Objective</h4>To determine whether the 12 items of the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) can be combined into a single summary score reflecting intervention reporting completeness and quality.<h4>Design</h4>Systematic review and reanalysis of published data. After a systematic search of the published literature, 16 review articles were retrieved with 489 sets of 12 TIDieR ratings of experimental intervention, comparator, or the 2 combined as reported in primary s ...[more]

PMID: 33543082

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeOutcomes of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been shown to influence clinical decision making. Thus, the quality and reliability of these outcomes are essential for both patients and medical care providers. To date, no study has assessed the quality of intervention reporting of RCTs in orthopaedics. The aim of this study was to evaluate the quality of intervention reporting of published RCTs in the field of orthopaedics using the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist.MethodsIn this cross-sectional analysis, we applied the TIDieR checklist to assess the quality of intervention reporting in orthopaedic RCTs. Additionally, we evaluated the TIDieR checklist's influence on intervention reporting by comparing overall adherence to checklist items in trials published before the TIDieR checklist's release versus trials published after its release. Finally, we assessed whether certain factors were associated with the quality of intervention reporting.ResultsFrom a random sample of 300 publications in orthopaedic journals, 175 parallel-arm and cluster RCTs were identified. The overall rate of adherence to TIDieR items was 58.4%. Only 31.4% of orthopaedic RCTs adhered to at least 6 of the 12 TIDieR checklist items, whereas 0% adhered to all 12 items. We found no significant improvement in the quality of intervention reporting in studies published after the TIDieR checklist's release compared with studies published before its release (P = .97). Additionally, preregistered trials were associated with more complete intervention reporting.ConclusionsOur results suggest suboptimal reporting of orthopaedic RCT interventions. In addition, the TIDieR checklist's intended effect-to better the quality of RCT intervention reporting-appears to have fallen short of its goal.Clinical relevanceBecause outcomes of RCTs are used to guide clinical decision making, it is essential that orthopaedic surgeons and clinical practice guideline panels are equipped with high-quality published research. Increasing the accuracy of intervention reporting may lead to more accurate clinical application. Thus, adoption of more stringent reporting of trial interventions by researchers, authors, and journal editors may improve the quality of orthopaedic research, as well as improve patient outcomes.

Project description:IntroductionScientific progress and translation of evidence into practice is impeded by poorly described interventions. The Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) was developed to specify the minimal intervention elements that should be reported.Objectives(1) To assess the extent to which outpatient pharmacy interventions were adequately reported. (2) To examine the dimension(s) across which reporting quality varies. (3) To examine trial characteristics that predict better reporting.MethodsThe sample comprised 86 randomised controlled trials identified in a Cochrane review of the effectiveness of pharmacist interventions on patient health outcomes. Duplicate, independent application of a modified 15-item TIDieR checklist was undertaken to assess the intervention reporting. The reporting/non-reporting of TIDieR items was analysed with principal component analysis to evaluate the dimensionality of reporting quality and regression analyses to assess predictors of reporting quality RESULTS: In total, 422 (40%) TIDieR items were fully reported, 395 (38%) were partially reported and 231 (22%) were not reported. A further 242 items were deemed not applicable to the specific trials. Reporting quality loaded on one component which accounted for 26% of the variance in TIDieR scores. More recent trials reported a slightly greater number of TIDieR items (0.07 (95% CI 0.02 to 0.13) additional TIDieR items per year of publication). Trials reported an 0.09 (95% CI 0.04 to 0.14) additional TIDieR items per unit increase in impact factor (IF) of the journal in which the main report was published.ConclusionsMost trials lacked adequate intervention reporting. This diminished the applied and scientific value of their research. The standard of intervention reporting is, however, gradually increasing and appears somewhat better in journals with higher IFs. The use of the TIDieR checklist to improve reporting could enhance the utility and replicability of trials, and reduce research waste.

Project description:BackgroundPrevious reviews show that reporting guidelines have improved the quality of trial reports in medicine, yet existing guidelines may not be fully suited for social and psychological intervention trials.Objective/designWe conducted a two-part study that reviewed (1) reporting guidelines for and (2) the reporting quality of social and psychological intervention trials.Data sources(1) To identify reporting guidelines, we systematically searched multiple electronic databases and reporting guideline registries. (2) To identify trials, we hand-searched 40 journals with the 10 highest impact factors in clinical psychology, criminology, education, and social work. ELIGIBILITY: (1) Reporting guidelines consisted of articles introducing a checklist of reporting standards relevant to social and psychological intervention trials. (2) Trials reported randomised experiments of complex interventions with psychological, social, or health outcomes.Results(1) We identified 19 reporting guidelines that yielded 147 reporting standards relevant to social and psychological interventions. Social and behavioural science guidelines included 89 standards not found in CONSORT guidelines. However, CONSORT guidelines used more recommended techniques for development and dissemination compared to other guidelines. (2) Our review of trials (n = 239) revealed that many standards were poorly reported, such as identification as a randomised trial in titles (20% reported the information) and abstracts (55%); information about blinding (15%), sequence generation (23%), and allocation concealment (17%); and details about actual delivery of experimental (43%) and control interventions (34%), participant uptake (25%), and service environment (28%). Only 11 of 40 journals referenced reporting guidelines in "Instructions to Authors."ConclusionExisting reporting guidelines have important limitations in content, development, and/or dissemination. Important details are routinely missing from trial publications; most leading journals in social and behavioural sciences do not ask authors to follow reporting standards. Findings demonstrate a need to develop a CONSORT extension with updated standards for social and psychological intervention trials.

Dataset Information

The Template for Intervention Description and Replication as a Measure of Intervention Reporting Quality: Rasch Analysis.

Objective

Design

Setting

Participants

Interventions

Main outcome measures

Results

Conclusion

Publications

The Template for Intervention Description and Replication as a Measure of Intervention Reporting Quality: Rasch Analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets