Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32273313›Full record

GuidelineBMJ open2020

Guidance for reporting intervention development studies in health research (GUIDED): an evidence-based consensus study.

Edward Duncan, Alicia O'Cathain, Nikki Rousseau, Liz Croot, Katie Sworn, Katrina M Turner, Lucy Yardley, Pat Hoddinott

Abstract readGuideline
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Guideline in BMJ open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 282 papers, 9 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
282citing papers in PubMed, 9 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

282 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. What Are the Effective Components of Group-Based Treatment Programs For Smoking Cessation? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2023
    Pooled it
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Intervention Mapping: A Framework to Co-Design the ALAPAGE Programme to Simultaneously Improve Dietary Diversity and Physical Fitness Among Older People.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026
    Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

222 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Edward DuncanNursing, Midwifery and Allied Health Professional Research Unit, University of Stirling, Stirling, UK edward.duncan@stir.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-3400-905X
Alicia O'CathainSchool of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-4033-506X
Nikki RousseauNursing, Midwifery and Allied Health Professional Research Unit, University of Stirling, Stirling, UK.
Liz CrootSchool of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.
Katie SwornHealth Economics and Decision Science, School of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.
Katrina M TurnerBristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-6375-2918
Lucy YardleyPsychology, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Pat HoddinottNursing, Midwifery and Allied Health Professional Research Unit, University of Stirling, Stirling, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-4372-9681

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/K025643/1Medical Research Council MR/N015339/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo improve the quality and consistency of intervention development reporting in health research.

designThis was a consensus exercise consisting of two simultaneous and identical three-round e-Delphi studies (one with experts in intervention development and one with wider stakeholders including funders, journal editors and public involvement members), followed by a consensus workshop. Delphi items were systematically derived from two preceding systematic reviews and a qualitative interview study.

participantsIntervention developers (n=26) and wider stakeholders (n=18) from the UK, North America and Europe participated in separate e-Delphi studies. Intervention developers (n=13) and wider stakeholders (n=13) participated in a 1-day consensus workshop.

resultse-Delphi participants achieved consensus on 15 reporting items. Following feedback from the consensus meeting, the final inclusion and wording of 14 items with description and explanations for each item were agreed. Items focus on context, purpose, target population, approaches, evidence, theory, guiding principles, stakeholder contribution, changes in content or format during the development process, required changes for subgroups, continuing uncertainties, and open access publication. They form the GUIDED (GUIDance for the rEporting of intervention Development) checklist, which contains a description and explanation of each item, alongside examples of good reporting.

conclusionsConsensus-based reporting guidance for intervention development in health research is now available for publishers and researchers to use. GUIDED has the potential to lead to greater transparency, and enhance quality and improve learning about intervention development research and practice.

Indexed as

ChecklistResearch ReportConsensusDelphi TechniqueEuropeHumansNorth AmericaStakeholder ParticipationUnited KingdomconsensusDelphiintervention developmentreporting guidance

Identifiers

PMID32273313
PMCPMC7245409

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.