Cargando…

Do pharmacy intervention reports adequately describe their interventions? A template for intervention description and replication analysis of reports included in a systematic review

INTRODUCTION: Scientific 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 t...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: de Barra, Mícheál, Scott, Claire, Johnston, Marie, De Bruin, M, Scott, Neil, Matheson, Catriona, Bond, Christine, Watson, Margaret
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6937059/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31862736
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-025511
_version_ 1783483814469697536
author de Barra, Mícheál
Scott, Claire
Johnston, Marie
De Bruin, M
Scott, Neil
Matheson, Catriona
Bond, Christine
Watson, Margaret
author_facet de Barra, Mícheál
Scott, Claire
Johnston, Marie
De Bruin, M
Scott, Neil
Matheson, Catriona
Bond, Christine
Watson, Margaret
author_sort de Barra, Mícheál
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Scientific 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. METHODS: The 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. CONCLUSIONS: Most 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.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6937059
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-69370592020-01-06 Do pharmacy intervention reports adequately describe their interventions? A template for intervention description and replication analysis of reports included in a systematic review de Barra, Mícheál Scott, Claire Johnston, Marie De Bruin, M Scott, Neil Matheson, Catriona Bond, Christine Watson, Margaret BMJ Open Evidence Based Practice INTRODUCTION: Scientific 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. METHODS: The 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. CONCLUSIONS: Most 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. BMJ Publishing Group 2019-12-19 /pmc/articles/PMC6937059/ /pubmed/31862736 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-025511 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.
spellingShingle Evidence Based Practice
de Barra, Mícheál
Scott, Claire
Johnston, Marie
De Bruin, M
Scott, Neil
Matheson, Catriona
Bond, Christine
Watson, Margaret
Do pharmacy intervention reports adequately describe their interventions? A template for intervention description and replication analysis of reports included in a systematic review
title Do pharmacy intervention reports adequately describe their interventions? A template for intervention description and replication analysis of reports included in a systematic review
title_full Do pharmacy intervention reports adequately describe their interventions? A template for intervention description and replication analysis of reports included in a systematic review
title_fullStr Do pharmacy intervention reports adequately describe their interventions? A template for intervention description and replication analysis of reports included in a systematic review
title_full_unstemmed Do pharmacy intervention reports adequately describe their interventions? A template for intervention description and replication analysis of reports included in a systematic review
title_short Do pharmacy intervention reports adequately describe their interventions? A template for intervention description and replication analysis of reports included in a systematic review
title_sort do pharmacy intervention reports adequately describe their interventions? a template for intervention description and replication analysis of reports included in a systematic review
topic Evidence Based Practice
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6937059/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31862736
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-025511
work_keys_str_mv AT debarramicheal dopharmacyinterventionreportsadequatelydescribetheirinterventionsatemplateforinterventiondescriptionandreplicationanalysisofreportsincludedinasystematicreview
AT scottclaire dopharmacyinterventionreportsadequatelydescribetheirinterventionsatemplateforinterventiondescriptionandreplicationanalysisofreportsincludedinasystematicreview
AT johnstonmarie dopharmacyinterventionreportsadequatelydescribetheirinterventionsatemplateforinterventiondescriptionandreplicationanalysisofreportsincludedinasystematicreview
AT debruinm dopharmacyinterventionreportsadequatelydescribetheirinterventionsatemplateforinterventiondescriptionandreplicationanalysisofreportsincludedinasystematicreview
AT scottneil dopharmacyinterventionreportsadequatelydescribetheirinterventionsatemplateforinterventiondescriptionandreplicationanalysisofreportsincludedinasystematicreview
AT mathesoncatriona dopharmacyinterventionreportsadequatelydescribetheirinterventionsatemplateforinterventiondescriptionandreplicationanalysisofreportsincludedinasystematicreview
AT bondchristine dopharmacyinterventionreportsadequatelydescribetheirinterventionsatemplateforinterventiondescriptionandreplicationanalysisofreportsincludedinasystematicreview
AT watsonmargaret dopharmacyinterventionreportsadequatelydescribetheirinterventionsatemplateforinterventiondescriptionandreplicationanalysisofreportsincludedinasystematicreview