Better reporting of interventions: template for intervention description and replication (TIDieR) checklist and guide

Hoffmann, Tammy; Glasziou, Paul; Boutron, Isabelle; Milne, Ruairidh; Perera, Rafael; Moher, David; Altman, Douglas G.; Barbour, Virginia; Macdonald, Helen; Johnston, Marie; Lamb, Sarah E; Dixon‐Woods, Mary; McCulloch, Peter; Wyatt, Jeremy; Chan, An‐Wen; Michie, Susan

doi:10.1136/bmj.g1687

Cited by 6,586 publications

(6,086 citation statements)

References 73 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

5,636

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Factors associated with nonparticipation included a sense of “research fatigue” and concern about added work burden the study might generate. The Template for Intervention Description and Replication checklist23 is provided in Table S1. Ninety‐eight participants were excluded for having <9 of 12 months of available adherence data at any participating study site during the intensive phase (Figure 2), leaving 304 for analysis.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Improving Delivery of Secondary Prophylaxis for Rheumatic Heart Disease in a High‐Burden Setting: Outcome of a Stepped‐Wedge, Community, Randomized Trial

Ralph

Dassel

Kirby

et al. 2018

JAHA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundHealth system strengthening is needed to improve delivery of secondary prophylaxis against rheumatic heart disease.Methods and ResultsWe undertook a stepped‐wedge, randomized trial in northern Australia. Five pairs of Indigenous community clinics entered the study at 3‐month steps. Study phases comprised a 12 month baseline phase, 3 month transition phase, 12 month intensive phase and a 3‐ to 12‐month maintenance phase. Clinics received a multicomponent intervention supporting activities to improve penicillin delivery, aligned with the chronic care model, with continuous quality‐improvement feedback on adherence. The primary outcome was the proportion receiving ≥80% of scheduled penicillin injections. Secondary outcomes included “days at risk” of acute rheumatic fever recurrence related to late penicillin and acute rheumatic fever recurrence rates. Overall, 304 patients requiring prophylaxis were eligible. The proportion receiving ≥80% of scheduled injections during baseline was 141 of 304 (46%)—higher than anticipated. No effect attributable to the study was evident: in the intensive phase, 126 of 304 (41%) received ≥80% of scheduled injections (odds ratio compared with baseline: 0.78; 95% confidence interval, 0.54–1.11). There was modest improvement in the maintenance phase among high‐adhering patients (43% received ≥90% of injections versus 30% [baseline] and 28% [intensive], P<0.001). Also, the proportion of days at risk in the whole cohort decreased in the maintenance phase (0.28 versus 0.32 [baseline] and 0.34 [intensive], P=0.001). Acute rheumatic fever recurrence rates did not differ between study sites during the intensive phase and the whole jurisdiction (3.0 versus 3.5 recurrences per 100 patient‐years, P=0.65).ConclusionsThis strategy did not improve adherence to rheumatic heart disease secondary prophylaxis within the study time frame. Longer term primary care strengthening strategies are needed.Clinical Trial Registration URL: http://www.anzctr.org.au. Unique identifier: ACTRN12613000223730.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Improving Delivery of Secondary Prophylaxis for Rheumatic Heart Disease in a High‐Burden Setting: Outcome of a Stepped‐Wedge, Community, Randomized Trial

Ralph

Dassel

Kirby

et al. 2018

JAHA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…variability in the use of the term usual care. Following frameworks, such as TIDieR 46, may help to maintain a minimum standard when reporting intervention descriptions. Control groups tended to be wait list or usual care.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Systematic review and meta‐analysis of internet‐delivered interventions providing personalized feedback for weight loss in overweight and obese adults

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryBackgroundObesity levels continue to rise annually. Face‐to‐face weight loss consultations have previously identified mixed effectiveness and face high demand with limited resources. Therefore, alternative interventions, such as internet‐delivered interventions, warrant further investigation. The aim was to assess whether internet‐delivered weight loss interventions providing personalized feedback were more effective for weight loss in overweight and obese adults in comparison with control groups receiving no personalized feedback.MethodNine databases were searched, and 12 studies were identified that met all inclusion criteria.ResultsMeta‐analysis, identified participants receiving personalized feedback via internet‐delivered interventions, had 2.13 kg mean difference (SMD) greater weight loss (and BMI change, waist circumference change and 5% weight loss) in comparison with control groups providing no personalized feedback. This was also true for results at 3 and 6‐month time points but not for studies where interventions lasted ≥12 months.ConclusionThis suggests that personalized feedback may be an important behaviour change technique (BCT) to incorporate within internet‐delivered weight loss interventions. However, meta‐analysis results revealed no differences between internet‐delivered weight loss interventions with personalized feedback and control interventions ≥12 months. Further investigation into longer term internet‐delivered interventions is required to examine how weight loss could be maintained. Future research examining which BCTs are most effective for internet‐delivered weight loss interventions is suggested.

show abstract

“…In this paper, we used the TIDieR checklist to systematically describe in detail all key elements of the C4S intervention (Bernhardt et al, 2016; Hoffmann et al, 2013; Hoffmann et al, 2014; Hoffmann et al, 2015). Recently, developing, monitoring, and reporting interventions by using TIDieR were suggested as an important step for improving the quality and transparency of recovery trials after stroke (Walker et al, 2017).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As a result of the lack of transparency, it is difficult to replicate interventions, properly interpret the effects, and implement promising interventions in clinical practice. The aim of the present paper is, therefore, to describe in detail the essential elements of the C4S intervention using the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist (Hoffmann et al, 2014; Hoffmann et al, 2015; Hoffmann, Erueti, & Glasziou, 2013). …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Description of the CARE4STROKE programme: A caregiver‐mediated exercises intervention with e‐health support for stroke patients

Vloothuis

Bruin

Mulder

et al. 2018

Physiotherapy Res Intl

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundIntensity of practice and task and context specificity are key factors for improving functional outcome in stroke survivors. Novel methods are needed to augment intensity of practice with minimal use of resources and costs. Caregiver‐mediated exercises (CMEs) focused on mobility, in which a caregiver acts as an exercise coach and can increase the intensity of practice. There is preliminary evidence that CME can improve functional outcome, reduce length of stay, and allow early supported discharge, without an increase in caregiver burden. In the CARE4STROKE programme (C4S), CME therapy and e‐health support are combined to promote a smoother transition from the inpatient setting to the home environment, with active rehabilitation continuing in the community.The objective of this paper is to describe the content of the C4S intervention in detail and explain implementation of this intervention in practice using the Template for Intervention Description and Replication checklist.MethodsContent, timing and intensity of the programme, participant screening and selection, and intervention procedures were described using the Template for Intervention Description and Replication checklist. Mobility exercises and use of a video application on tablet/smartphone are explained. The role of the caregiver as provider of the intervention is illustrated.DiscussionC4S prescribes an additional exercise dose of 1,200 min and may be a promising novel and effective method to augment the pallet of therapeutic options for stroke rehabilitation. Important aspects for successful implementation are availability and suitability of a caregiver. Suggestions for additional use of e‐health technology are described.Implications for physiotherapy practiceThe presented description of C4S gives physical therapists practical guidelines to facilitate implementation of the CME intervention.

show abstract

Better reporting of interventions: template for intervention description and replication (TIDieR) checklist and guide

Cited by 6,586 publications

References 73 publications

Improving Delivery of Secondary Prophylaxis for Rheumatic Heart Disease in a High‐Burden Setting: Outcome of a Stepped‐Wedge, Community, Randomized Trial

Improving Delivery of Secondary Prophylaxis for Rheumatic Heart Disease in a High‐Burden Setting: Outcome of a Stepped‐Wedge, Community, Randomized Trial

Systematic review and meta‐analysis of internet‐delivered interventions providing personalized feedback for weight loss in overweight and obese adults

Description of the CARE4STROKE programme: A caregiver‐mediated exercises intervention with e‐health support for stroke patients

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About