Journal of clinical epidemiology
-
Comparative Study
Understanding the applicability of results from primary care trials: lessons learned from applying PRECIS-2.
To compare two approaches for trial teams to apply PRECIS-2 to pragmatic trials: independent scoring and scoring following a group discussion. ⋯ PRECIS-2 can facilitate information exchange within trial teams. To apply PRECIS-2 successfully, we recommend a discussion between those with detailed understanding of what usual care is for the intervention, the trial's design including operational and technical aspects, and the PRECIS-2 domains. For some cluster-randomized trials, greater insight may be gained by plotting two PRECIS-2 wheels, one at the individual participant level and another at the cluster level.
-
Pragmatic trials aim to inform clinical decision making by measuring the effect of a treatment in clinical practice. The purpose of the PRECIS-2 tool is to support in designing a truly pragmatic trial. ⋯ The tool will prove particularly useful when implemented in the process of trial design. However, it is yet unclear how e.g., possible dependencies between PRECIS domains, or conducting a pragmatic trial within an existing data registry (e.g., electronic health records) affect the applicability of the tool.
-
Complex interventions are widely used in health systems, public health, education, and communities and are increasingly the subject of systematic reviews. Oversimplification and inconsistencies in reporting about complex interventions can limit the usability of review findings. ⋯ PRISMA-CI development followed the Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research Network guidance for extensions and focused on adding or modifying only essential items that are truly unique to complex interventions and are not covered by broader interpretation of current PRISMA guidance. PRISMA-CI provides an important structure and guidance for systematic reviews and meta-analyses for the highly prevalent and dynamic field of complex interventions.
-
Complex interventions are widely used in health care, public health, education, criminology, social work, business, and welfare. They have increasingly become the subject of systematic reviews and are challenging to effectively report. The Complex Interventions Methods Workgroup developed an extension to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses for Complex Interventions (PRISMA-CI). ⋯ The EE document explains the meaning and rationale for each unique PRISMA-CI checklist item and provides examples to assist systematic review authors in operationalizing PRISMA-CI guidance. The Complex Interventions Workgroup developed PRISMA-CI as an important start toward increased consistency in reporting of systematic reviews of complex interventions. Because the field is rapidly expanding, the Complex Interventions Methods Workgroup plans to re-evaluate periodically for the need to add increasing specificity and examples as the field matures.
-
Rigorous and transparent bias assessment is a core component of high-quality systematic reviews. We assess modifications to existing risk of bias approaches to incorporate rigorous quasi-experimental approaches with selection on unobservables. These are nonrandomized studies using design-based approaches to control for unobservable sources of confounding such as difference studies, instrumental variables, interrupted time series, natural experiments, and regression-discontinuity designs. ⋯ We conclude that tools for nonrandomized studies of interventions need to be further developed to incorporate evaluation questions for quasi-experiments with selection on unobservables.