Rationale and design of repeated cross-sectional studies to evaluate the reporting quality of trial protocols: the Adherence to SPIrit REcommendations (ASPIRE) study and associated projects.
Randomized clinical trials
Registration
Reporting guideline adherence
Reporting quality
Trial discontinuation
Trial protocol
Journal
Trials
ISSN: 1745-6215
Titre abrégé: Trials
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101263253
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
28 Oct 2020
28 Oct 2020
Historique:
received:
10
06
2020
accepted:
16
10
2020
entrez:
29
10
2020
pubmed:
30
10
2020
medline:
22
6
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Clearly structured and comprehensive protocols are an essential component to ensure safety of participants, data validity, successful conduct, and credibility of results of randomized clinical trials (RCTs). Funding agencies, research ethics committees (RECs), regulatory agencies, medical journals, systematic reviewers, and other stakeholders rely on protocols to appraise the conduct and reporting of RCTs. In response to evidence of poor protocol quality, the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials (SPIRIT) guideline was published in 2013 to improve the accuracy and completeness of clinical trial protocols. The impact of these recommendations on protocol completeness and associations between protocol completeness and successful RCT conduct and publication remain uncertain. Aims of the Adherence to SPIrit REcommendations (ASPIRE) study are to investigate adherence to SPIRIT checklist items of RCT protocols approved by RECs in the UK, Switzerland, Germany, and Canada before (2012) and after (2016) the publication of the SPIRIT guidelines; determine protocol features associated with non-adherence to SPIRIT checklist items; and assess potential differences in adherence across countries. We assembled an international cohort of RCTs based on 450 protocols approved in 2012 and 402 protocols approved in 2016 by RECs in Switzerland, the UK, Germany, and Canada. We will extract data on RCT characteristics and adherence to SPIRIT for all included protocols. We will use multivariable regression models to investigate temporal changes in SPIRIT adherence, differences across countries, and associations between SPIRIT adherence of protocols with RCT registration, completion, and publication of results. We plan substudies to examine the registration, premature discontinuation, and non-publication of RCTs; the use of patient-reported outcomes in RCT protocols; SPIRIT adherence of RCT protocols with non-regulated interventions; the planning of RCT subgroup analyses; and the use of routinely collected data for RCTs. The ASPIRE study and associated substudies will provide important information on the impact of measures to improve the reporting of RCT protocols and on multiple aspects of RCT design, trial registration, premature discontinuation, and non-publication of RCTs observing potential changes over time.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Clearly structured and comprehensive protocols are an essential component to ensure safety of participants, data validity, successful conduct, and credibility of results of randomized clinical trials (RCTs). Funding agencies, research ethics committees (RECs), regulatory agencies, medical journals, systematic reviewers, and other stakeholders rely on protocols to appraise the conduct and reporting of RCTs. In response to evidence of poor protocol quality, the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials (SPIRIT) guideline was published in 2013 to improve the accuracy and completeness of clinical trial protocols. The impact of these recommendations on protocol completeness and associations between protocol completeness and successful RCT conduct and publication remain uncertain.
OBJECTIVES AND METHODS
OBJECTIVE
Aims of the Adherence to SPIrit REcommendations (ASPIRE) study are to investigate adherence to SPIRIT checklist items of RCT protocols approved by RECs in the UK, Switzerland, Germany, and Canada before (2012) and after (2016) the publication of the SPIRIT guidelines; determine protocol features associated with non-adherence to SPIRIT checklist items; and assess potential differences in adherence across countries. We assembled an international cohort of RCTs based on 450 protocols approved in 2012 and 402 protocols approved in 2016 by RECs in Switzerland, the UK, Germany, and Canada. We will extract data on RCT characteristics and adherence to SPIRIT for all included protocols. We will use multivariable regression models to investigate temporal changes in SPIRIT adherence, differences across countries, and associations between SPIRIT adherence of protocols with RCT registration, completion, and publication of results. We plan substudies to examine the registration, premature discontinuation, and non-publication of RCTs; the use of patient-reported outcomes in RCT protocols; SPIRIT adherence of RCT protocols with non-regulated interventions; the planning of RCT subgroup analyses; and the use of routinely collected data for RCTs.
DISCUSSION
CONCLUSIONS
The ASPIRE study and associated substudies will provide important information on the impact of measures to improve the reporting of RCT protocols and on multiple aspects of RCT design, trial registration, premature discontinuation, and non-publication of RCTs observing potential changes over time.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33115541
doi: 10.1186/s13063-020-04808-y
pii: 10.1186/s13063-020-04808-y
pmc: PMC7594472
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
896Références
J Clin Epidemiol. 2009 Sep;62(9):967-73
pubmed: 19635403
BMJ. 2011 Jan 06;342:c7153
pubmed: 21212122
Trials. 2018 Jan 11;19(1):29
pubmed: 29325575
Am J Clin Nutr. 2016 Jun;103(6):1385-6
pubmed: 27146649
BMJ. 2005 May 7;330(7499):1049
pubmed: 15817527
Trials. 2018 Aug 23;19(1):448
pubmed: 30134950
BMJ. 2016 Feb 17;352:i637
pubmed: 26888209
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011 Jan 19;(1):MR000031
pubmed: 21249714
PLoS Med. 2007 Jan;4(1):e19
pubmed: 17227134
BMJ. 2014 Jul 16;349:g4539
pubmed: 25030633
Lancet. 2008 Jul 19;372(9634):201
pubmed: 18640445
Qual Life Res. 2011 Jun;20(5):653-64
pubmed: 21110123
Haematologica. 2006 Mar;91(3):293-5
pubmed: 16531251
Ann Oncol. 2015 Jan;26(1):231-237
pubmed: 25355720
Lancet. 2014 Jan 18;383(9913):257-66
pubmed: 24411650
PLoS One. 2013 Oct 04;8(10):e76625
pubmed: 24124580
Int J Epidemiol. 2020 Jun 1;49(3):968-978
pubmed: 32176282
Clin Epidemiol. 2016 Jul 08;8:261-6
pubmed: 27468249
JAMA. 2017 Nov 7;318(17):1709-1711
pubmed: 28892118
Rev Panam Salud Publica. 2015 Dec;38(6):506-14
pubmed: 27440100
PLoS One. 2014 Oct 15;9(10):e110229
pubmed: 25333349
Adv Nutr. 2017 Jul 14;8(4):532-545
pubmed: 28710141
BMJ. 2013 Jan 08;346:e7586
pubmed: 23303884
JAMA. 2017 May 2;317(17):1799-1801
pubmed: 28464134
JAMA. 1998 Jan 28;279(4):281-6
pubmed: 9450711
Ann Oncol. 2016 Jan;27(1):209
pubmed: 26612098
JAMA. 2014 Mar 12;311(10):1045-51
pubmed: 24618966
BMJ Open. 2016 Jun 03;6(6):e011188
pubmed: 27259528
BMJ. 2017 Mar 14;356:j917
pubmed: 28292744
Med Care. 2012 Dec;50(12):1060-70
pubmed: 22922434
BMJ. 2010 Mar 30;340:c117
pubmed: 20354011
Lancet. 2006 May 20;367(9523):1631-3
pubmed: 16714166
JAMA. 2013 Feb 27;309(8):814-22
pubmed: 23443445
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2006 Oct 11;4:79
pubmed: 17034633
JAMA. 2004 May 26;291(20):2457-65
pubmed: 15161896
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2012 Aug 28;12:131
pubmed: 22928744
J Clin Pharm Ther. 2003 Dec;28(6):513-21
pubmed: 14651676
JAMA. 2006 Apr 12;295(14):1645-6
pubmed: 16609085
JAMA. 2003 Jul 23;290(4):516-23
pubmed: 12876095
Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2016 Oct;72(10):1283-1288
pubmed: 27484242
Health Technol Assess. 2010 Feb;14(8):iii, ix-xi, 1-193
pubmed: 20181324