Medical Research Council Epidemiology Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Faculty of Education, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Trials. 2023 Mar 22;24(1):176. doi: 10.1186/s13063-023-07215-1.
Reporting of intervention research has been inadequate for many years. The development and promotion of freely available checklists aims to address this problem by providing researchers with a list of items that require reporting to enable study interpretation and replication. In this commentary, we present evidence from a recent systematic review of 51 randomised controlled trials published 2015-2020 that inadequate intervention reporting remains a widespread issue and that checklists are not being used to describe all intervention components. In 2022, we assessed the submission guidelines of 33 journals that published articles included in our review and found that just one at the time encouraged the use of reporting checklists for all intervention components. To drive progress, we contacted the editors of the other 32 journals and requested that they update their submission guidelines in response. We conclude by highlighting the waste associated with current practices and encourage journals from all fields to urgently review their submission guidelines. Only through collective action can we build an evidence base that is fit for purpose.
多年来,干预研究报告一直不充分。自由获取检查表的制定和推广旨在通过为研究人员提供一份需要报告的项目清单来解决这个问题,以便于研究解释和复制。在这篇评论中,我们提出了最近对 2015 年至 2020 年发表的 51 项随机对照试验进行的系统评价的证据,表明不充分的干预报告仍然是一个普遍存在的问题,而且检查表并未被用于描述所有干预措施。2022 年,我们评估了我们综述中包含的文章所发表的 33 本期刊的投稿指南,发现当时只有一本期刊鼓励使用报告检查表来描述所有的干预组件。为了推动进展,我们联系了其他 32 本期刊的编辑,并要求他们根据情况更新投稿指南。最后我们强调了当前实践相关的浪费,并鼓励所有领域的期刊都紧急审查他们的投稿指南。只有通过集体行动,我们才能建立一个符合目的的证据基础。