Reporting of PPI and the MCID in phase III/IV randomised controlled trials—a systematic review

3Citations
Citations of this article
14Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: Patient and public involvement (PPI) in clinical trial design contributes to ensuring the research objectives and outcome measures are relevant to patients. The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in the primary outcome influences trial design and feasibility and should be predicated on PPI. We aimed to determine current practice of reporting PPI and the MCID in phase III/IV randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Methods: Following a search of Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, we included primary publications of phase III/IV RCTs, in English, inclusive of any medical specialty or type of intervention, that reported a health-related outcome. We excluded protocols and secondary publications of RCTs. We extracted RCT characteristics, the use of PPI, and use of the MCID. Results: Between 1 July 2019 and 13 January 2020, 123 phase III/IV RCTs matched our eligibility criteria. Ninety percent evaluated a medical rather than surgical intervention. Oncology accounted for 21% of all included RCTs. Only 2.4% (n = 3) and 1.6% (n = 2) RCTs described PPI and the MCID respectively. Conclusions: PPI and the MCID are poorly reported, so it is uncertain how these contributed to trial design. Improvement in the reporting of these items would increase confidence that results are relevant and clinically significant to patients, contributing to improving the overall trial design. Trial registration: Not registered.

References Powered by Scopus

The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews

47646Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

CONSORT 2010 Statement: Updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials

6580Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Measurement of health status. Ascertaining the minimal clinically important difference

4072Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Power to Detect What? Considerations for Planning and Evaluating Sample Size

55Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Patient and public involvement is suboptimal in randomized controlled trials addressing a chronic condition

3Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Patient and Public Involvement and Engagement in the Development of a Platform Clinical Trial for Parkinson's Disease: An Evaluation Protocol

0Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Brennan, J., Poon, M. T. C., Christopher, E., Fulton, O., Porteous, C., & Brennan, P. M. (2023, December 1). Reporting of PPI and the MCID in phase III/IV randomised controlled trials—a systematic review. Trials. BioMed Central Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-023-07367-0

Readers over time

‘23‘24‘2502468

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 4

67%

Lecturer / Post doc 1

17%

Researcher 1

17%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Medicine and Dentistry 2

40%

Nursing and Health Professions 1

20%

Social Sciences 1

20%

Engineering 1

20%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free
0