Evaluation of the completeness of intervention reporting in Cochrane surgical systematic reviews using the TIDieR-SR checklist: a cross-sectional study

Vassar, Matt; Page, Matthew J.; Glasbey, James; Cooper, Craig; Jorski, Austin; Sosio, Jessica; Wayant, Cole

doi:10.1136/bmjebm-2020-111417

Cited by 7 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…29 The data extracted will include specific details about each study. Details of the evidence-based leadership interventions will be extracted following the TIDIeR (Template for Intervention Description and Replication) checklist 40 : brief name; why the intervention is essential; materials and procedures; providers and their expertise; models of delivery; location and infrastructure; sessions; tailoring; modifications; planned and actual adherence or fidelity. The intervention data will be extracted by two authors (JV and KH).…”

Section: Methods and Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Measured and perceived impacts of evidence-based leadership in nursing: a mixed-methods systematic review protocol

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionDespite the abundance of existing literature on evidence-based nursing practice, knowledge regarding evidence-based leadership, that is, leadership supported by an evidence-based approach, is lacking. Our aim is to conduct a mixed-methods systematic review with qualitative and quantitative studies to examine how evidence is used to solve leadership problems and to describe the measured and perceived effects of evidence-based leadership on nurses and nurse leaders and their performance as well as on organisational and clinical outcomes.Methods and analysisWe will search the following databases with no year limit or language restrictions: CINAHL (EBSCO), Cochrane Library, Embase (Elsevier), PsycINFO (EBSCO), PubMed (MEDLINE), Scopus (Elsevier) and Web of Science. In addition, the databases for prospectively registered trials and other systematic reviews will be screened. We will include articles using any type of research design as long as the study includes a component of an evidence-based leadership approach. Three reviewers will independently screen all titles, abstracts and full-text articles and two reviewers will extract the data according to the appropriate checklists. The quality of each study will be appraised using specific appraisal tool fitting in study design used in each study. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) grid, PRISMA Protocols, Synthesis Without Meta-analysis and ENTREQ will guide the study process and reporting. Outcomes related to individual or group performance of nurses or nurse managers regarding leadership skills (e.g., communication skills), organisational outcomes (e.g., work environment, costs) and clinical outcomes (e.g., patient quality of life, treatment satisfaction) will be extracted and synthesised.Ethics and disseminationThis systematic review will not include empirical data, and therefore, ethics approval will not be sought. The results of the review will be disseminated in a peer-reviewed scientific journal and in a conference presentation.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42021259624.

show abstract

Section: Methods and Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Measured and perceived impacts of evidence-based leadership in nursing: a mixed-methods systematic review protocol

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The effectiveness of reporting guidelines in improving the reporting quality of publications has been proven (10). However, despite the availability of guidelines that might guide surgical technique reporting, most of the studies related to interventional surgical technique lacked complete and detailed descriptions of the surgical interventions, and some even provided only the names of the interventions (11)(12)(13)(14)(15).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The SUPER reporting guideline suggested for reporting of surgical technique

Zhang¹,

Ma²,

Wu³

et al. 2023

Hepatobiliary Surg Nutr

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Existing reporting guidelines pay insufficient attention to the detail and comprehensiveness reporting of surgical technique. The Surgical techniqUe rePorting chEcklist and standaRds (SUPER) aims to address this gap by defining reporting standards for surgical technique. The SUPER guideline intends to apply to articles that encompass surgical technique in any study design, surgical discipline, and stage of surgical innovation.Methods: Following the EQUATOR (Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research) Network approach, 16 surgeons, journal editors, and methodologists reviewed existing reporting guidelines relating to surgical technique, reviewed papers from 15 top journals, and brainstormed to draft initial items for the SUPER. The initial items were revised through a three-round Delphi survey from 21 multidisciplinary Delphi panel experts from 13 countries and regions. The final SUPER items were formed after an online consensus meeting to resolve disagreements and a three-round wording refinement by all 16 SUPER working group members and five SUPER consultants. Results:The SUPER reporting guideline includes 22 items that are considered essential for good and informative surgical technique reporting. The items are divided into six sections: background, rationale, and objectives (items 1 to 5); preoperative preparations and requirements (items 6 to 9); surgical technique details (items 10 to 15); postoperative considerations and tasks (items 16 to 19); summary and prospect (items 20 and 21); and other information (item 22). Conclusions:The SUPER reporting guideline has the potential to guide detailed, comprehensive, and transparent surgical technique reporting for surgeons. It may also assist journal editors, peer reviewers, systematic reviewers, and guideline developers in the evaluation of surgical technique papers and help practitioners to better understand and reproduce surgical technique.Trial Registration: https://www.equator-network.org/library/reporting-guidelines-under-development/ reporting-guidelines-under-development-for-other-study-designs/#SUPER

show abstract

“…Previous studies investigating the reporting qualities of the clinical trials before and after the publication of guidelines showed that the development of CONSORT [ 18 , 19 ] and STRICTA [ 20 , 21 ] led to improvements of the overall reporting qualities. Cross-sectional investigations on the quality of intervention reporting of clinical trials based on TIDieR checklist [ 22 – 25 ] showed that while average completion of the checklist items did not show significant changes, the evaluations allowed further understanding of the description of interventions in clinical trials. However, the description of sham needles used in acupuncture trials have been partially addressed, suggesting that controls be described in a similar manner to active intervention.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reporting quality of sham needles used as controls in acupuncture trials: a methodological evaluation

Lee

Kim

et al. 2022

Chin Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective The description of controls is important in acupuncture clinical trials to interpret its effectiveness without fallacy. This paper aims to evaluate the reporting quality of acupuncture studies on the characteristics of sham needles. Study design and setting Using a checklist developed from previously published reporting guidelines, the distribution of reported items and changes of reporting rates over time were investigated. Two-way ANOVA and linear regression were conducted. Results Original articles of RCTs of any design involving sham needles as controls were eligible for assessment. 117 trials from three 2-year time periods between 2009 and 2018 were included. Seven items out of 25 were reported in more than 50% of the studies. While significant differences of reporting scores among categories were observed, there were no significant differences among time periods; no significant improvement was observed over time. Conclusions Low reporting qualities of sham needles used in acupuncture studies may influence how researchers understand the effectiveness of acupuncture. This study evaluated previous publications from 2009 to 2018 and found that reporting qualities on sham needles did not improve over time. Further studies are required to validate the items used in this study to endorse better reporting of controls in acupuncture trials.

show abstract

Evaluation of the completeness of intervention reporting in Cochrane surgical systematic reviews using the TIDieR-SR checklist: a cross-sectional study

Cited by 7 publications

References 19 publications

Measured and perceived impacts of evidence-based leadership in nursing: a mixed-methods systematic review protocol

Measured and perceived impacts of evidence-based leadership in nursing: a mixed-methods systematic review protocol

The SUPER reporting guideline suggested for reporting of surgical technique

Reporting quality of sham needles used as controls in acupuncture trials: a methodological evaluation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About