Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35926822›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical epidemiology2022

The RIPI-f (Reporting Integrity of Psychological Interventions delivered face-to-face) checklist was developed to guide reporting of treatment integrity in face-to-face psychological interventions.

Jesus Lopez-Alcalde, Ninib Yakoub, Markus Wolf, Thomas Munder, Erik von Elm, Christoph Flückiger, Christiane Steinert, Sarah Liebherz, Jenny Rosendahl, Claudia M Witt and 1 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical epidemiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Design, Implement, Sustain: Advancing Program-Led Interventions for Binge Eating, a Narrative Review.European eating disorders review : the journal of the Eating Disorders Association · 2026
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
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

11 authors at 6 institutions in 4 countries.

Jesus Lopez-AlcaldeInstitute for Complementary and Integrative Medicine, University Hospital Zurich and University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland; Faculty of Health Sciences, Universidad Francisco de Vitoria (UFV), Madrid, Spain; Instituto Ramón y Cajal de Investigación Sanitaria (IRYCIS), Unidad de bioestadística clínica, Hospital Universitario Ramón y Cajal, (CIBERESP), Madrid, Spain.
Ninib YakoubInstitute for Complementary and Integrative Medicine, University Hospital Zurich and University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Markus WolfDepartment of Psychology, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Thomas MunderDepartment of Psychology, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Erik von ElmCochrane Switzerland, Centre for Primary Care and Public Health (Unisanté), University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Christoph FlückigerDepartment of Psychology, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Christiane SteinertInternational Psychoanalytic University Berlin (IPU), Berlin, Germany; Department of Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, Justus Liebig University Giessen, Giessen, Germany.
Sarah LiebherzDepartment of Psychotherapy, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Jenny RosendahlInstitute of Psychosocial Medicine, Psychotherapy and Psychooncology, Jena University Hospital, Jena, Germany.
Claudia M WittInstitute for Complementary and Integrative Medicine, University Hospital Zurich and University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland; Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health, Institute of Social Medicine, Epidemiology and Health Economics, Berlin, Germany; Center for Integrative Medicine, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Jürgen BarthInstitute for Complementary and Integrative Medicine, University Hospital Zurich and University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland. Electronic address: mail@juergen-barth.de.
University of Zurich · CHCentre universitaire de médecine générale et santé publique, Lausanne · CHJena University Hospital · DEJustus-Liebig-Universität Gießen · DEUniversität Hamburg · DEUniversity of Maryland, Baltimore · US

Funding

Cochrane Complementary Medicine Field: Resource for ResearchR24AT001293 · NCCIH · UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND BALTIMORE · PI BERMAN, BRIAN M, WIELAND, LISA SUSAN · 2003 to 2022
$9.4M
NCCIH NIH HHS R24 AT001293
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesIntervention integrity is the degree to which the study intervention is delivered as intended. This article presents the RIPI-f checklist (Reporting Integrity of Psychological Interventions delivered face-to-face) and summarizes its development methods. RIPI-f proposes guidance for reporting intervention integrity in evaluative studies of face-to-face psychological interventions. STUDY DESIGN AND

settingWe followed established procedures for developing reporting guidelines. We examined 56 documents (reporting guidelines, bias tools, and methodological guidance) for relevant aspects of face-to-face psychological intervention integrity. Eighty four items were identified and grouped as per the template for intervention description and replication (TIDieR) domains. Twenty nine experts from psychology and medicine and other scholars rated the relevance of each item in a single-round Delphi survey. A multidisciplinary panel of 11 experts discussed the survey results in three online consensus meetings and drafted the final version of the checklist.

resultsWe propose RIPI-f, a checklist with 50 items. Our checklist enhances TIDieR with important extensions, such as therapeutic alliance, provider's allegiance, and the adherence of providers and participants.

conclusionRIPI-f can improve the reporting of face-to-face psychological interventions. The tool can help authors, researchers, systematic reviewers, and guideline developers. We suggest using RIPI-f alongside other reporting guidelines.

Indexed as

ChecklistPsychosocial InterventionConsensusDelphi TechniqueHumansResearch DesignResearch PersonnelAdherenceDelphi surveyFace-to-face psychological interventionFidelityNon-pharmacological interventionReporting guideline

Identifiers

PMID35926822
PMCPMC11192047
OpenAlexW4289340240

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.