Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorHemming, K
dc.contributor.authorCarroll, K
dc.contributor.authorThompson, J
dc.contributor.authorForbes, A
dc.contributor.authorTaljaard, M
dc.contributor.authorDutton, SJ
dc.contributor.authorMadurasinghe, V
dc.contributor.authorMorgan, K
dc.contributor.authorStuart, B
dc.contributor.authorFielding, K
dc.contributor.authorCornelius, V
dc.contributor.authorTurner, EL
dc.contributor.authorHooper, R
dc.contributor.authorGiraudeau, B
dc.contributor.authorSeed, PT
dc.contributor.authorNickless, A
dc.contributor.authorGrayling, M
dc.contributor.authorPrague, M
dc.contributor.authorKerry, S
dc.contributor.authorBell, L
dc.contributor.authorWatson, E
dc.contributor.authorGafoor, R
dc.contributor.authorMarlin, N
dc.contributor.authorYorganci, E
dc.contributor.authorSmith, L
dc.contributor.authorMbekwe, M
dc.contributor.authorTeerenstra, S
dc.contributor.authorChan, C
dc.contributor.authorMoerbeek, M
dc.contributor.authorJacobsen, P
dc.contributor.authorBond, S
dc.contributor.authorJones, Ben
dc.contributor.authorPreisser, J
dc.contributor.authorKanaan, M
dc.contributor.authorHewitt, C
dc.contributor.authorEaster, C
dc.contributor.authorPellatt-Higgins, T
dc.contributor.authorPankhurst, L
dc.contributor.authorAgbla, SC
dc.contributor.authorEldridge, S
dc.contributor.authorLerner, RG
dc.contributor.authorLeyrat, C
dc.contributor.authorPilling, M
dc.contributor.authorForman, JR
dc.contributor.authorBhattacharya, I
dc.contributor.authorMagill, N
dc.contributor.authorCandlish, J
dc.contributor.authorMcDowell, C
dc.contributor.authorMartin, J
dc.contributor.authorKristunas, C
dc.contributor.authorAllen, E
dc.contributor.authorSeward, N
dc.contributor.authorNicholls, E
dc.contributor.authorFranklin, BD
dc.date.accessioned2020-09-15T07:22:15Z
dc.date.issued2019-03
dc.identifier.issn0895-4356
dc.identifier.issn1878-5921
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10026.1/16256
dc.description.abstract

OBJECTIVES: The Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials extension for the stepped-wedge cluster randomized trial (SW-CRT) is a recently published reporting guideline for SW-CRTs. We assess the quality of reporting of a recent sample of SW-CRTs. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Quality of reporting was asssessed according to the 26 items in the new guideline using a novel crowd sourcing methodology conducted independently and in duplicate, with random assignment, by 50 reviewers. We assessed reliability of the quality assessments, proposing this as a novel way to assess robustness of items in reporting guidelines. RESULTS: Several items were well reported. Some items were very poorly reported, including several items that have unique requirements for the SW-CRT, such as the rationale for use of the design, description of the design, identification and recruitment of participants within clusters, and concealment of cluster allocation (not reported in more than 50% of the reports). Agreement across items was moderate (median percentage agreement was 76% [IQR 64 to 86]). Agreement was low for several items including the description of the trial design and why trial ended or stopped for example. CONCLUSIONS: When reporting SW-CRTs, authors should pay particular attention to ensure clear reporting on the exact format of the design with justification, as well as how clusters and individuals were identified for inclusion in the study, and whether this was done before or after randomization of the clusters, which are crucial for risk of bias assessments. Some items, including why the trial ended, might either not be relevant to SW-CRTs or might be unclearly described in the statement.

dc.format.extent77-88
dc.format.mediumPrint-Electronic
dc.languageen
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherElsevier BV
dc.subjectCONSORT
dc.subjectQuality of reporting
dc.subjectReliability
dc.subjectStepped-wedge cluster randomized trial
dc.subjectHumans
dc.subjectCluster Analysis
dc.subjectCrowdsourcing
dc.subjectRandomized Controlled Trials as Topic
dc.subjectResearch Design
dc.subjectSystematic Reviews as Topic
dc.titleQuality of stepped-wedge trial reporting can be reliably assessed using an updated CONSORT: crowd-sourcing systematic review
dc.typejournal-article
dc.typeJournal Article
dc.typeResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
dc.typeReview
plymouth.author-urlhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30500405
plymouth.volume107
plymouth.publication-statusPublished
plymouth.journalJournal of Clinical Epidemiology
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.jclinepi.2018.11.017
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Faculty of Health
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Users by role
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Users by role/Academics
dc.publisher.placeUnited States
dcterms.dateAccepted2018-11-19
dc.rights.embargodate2020-9-19
dc.identifier.eissn1878-5921
dc.rights.embargoperiodNot known
rioxxterms.versionofrecord10.1016/j.jclinepi.2018.11.017
rioxxterms.licenseref.urihttp://www.rioxx.net/licenses/all-rights-reserved
rioxxterms.licenseref.startdate2019-03
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Review


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record


All items in PEARL are protected by copyright law.
Author manuscripts deposited to comply with open access mandates are made available in accordance with publisher policies. Please cite only the published version using the details provided on the item record or document. In the absence of an open licence (e.g. Creative Commons), permissions for further reuse of content should be sought from the publisher or author.
Theme by 
Atmire NV