Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2023 Jun 20;8(1):6.
doi: 10.1186/s41073-023-00130-8.

Checklist to assess Trustworthiness in RAndomised Controlled Trials (TRACT checklist): concept proposal and pilot

Affiliations

Checklist to assess Trustworthiness in RAndomised Controlled Trials (TRACT checklist): concept proposal and pilot

Ben W Mol et al. Res Integr Peer Rev. .

Abstract

Objectives: To propose a checklist that can be used to assess trustworthiness of randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

Design: A screening tool was developed using the four-stage approach proposed by Moher et al. This included defining the scope, reviewing the evidence base, suggesting a list of items from piloting, and holding a consensus meeting. The initial checklist was set-up by a core group who had been involved in the assessment of problematic RCTs for several years. We piloted this in a consensus panel of several stakeholders, including health professionals, reviewers, journal editors, policymakers, researchers, and evidence-synthesis specialists. Each member was asked to score three articles with the checklist and the results were then discussed in consensus meetings.

Outcome: The Trustworthiness in RAndomised Clinical Trials (TRACT) checklist includes 19 items organised into seven domains that are applicable to every RCT: 1) Governance, 2) Author Group, 3) Plausibility of Intervention Usage, 4) Timeframe, 5) Drop-out Rates, 6) Baseline Characteristics, and 7) Outcomes. Each item can be answered as either no concerns, some concerns/no information, or major concerns. If a study is assessed and found to have a majority of items rated at a major concern level, then editors, reviewers or evidence synthesizers should consider a more thorough investigation, including assessment of original individual participant data.

Conclusions: The TRACT checklist is the first checklist developed specifically to detect trustworthiness issues in RCTs. It might help editors, publishers and researchers to screen for such issues in submitted or published RCTs in a transparent and replicable manner.

Keywords: Checklist; Randomised controlled trials; Research integrity; Trustworthiness.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

MvW is co-editor of the Netherlands Satellite of the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertiliy Group.

BWM is supported by a National Health Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Practitioner Fellowship (GNT1082548). BWM reports consultancy for ObsEva, Merck and Guerbet. All other authors have no conflicts of interest.

References

    1. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Definition of Research Misconduct. Available from https://ori.hhs.gov/definition-research-misconduct Accessed 10 Oct 2021.
    1. Fanelli D. How many scientists fabricate and falsify research? A systematic review and meta-analysis of survey data. PLoS One. 2009;4(5):e5738. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0005738. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Carlisle JB. False individual patient data and zombie randomised controlled trials submitted to Anaesthesia. Anaesthesia. 2021;76(4):472–479. doi: 10.1111/anae.15263. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Ioannidis JPA. Hundreds of thousands of zombie randomised trials circulate among us. Anaesthesia. 2021;76(4):444–447. doi: 10.1111/anae.15297. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Hariton E, Locascio JJ. Randomised controlled trials - the gold standard for effectiveness research: study design: randomised controlled trials. BJOG. 2018;125(13):1716–1816. doi: 10.1111/1471-0528.15199. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources