ReviewTrials2024
Defining usual care comparators when designing pragmatic trials of complex health interventions: a methodology review.
Review in Trials, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
18 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Reporting Completeness of Usual Care Comparator Groups in Exercise-Based Trials for Knee Osteoarthritis: A Meta-Research Systematic Review.Musculoskeletal care · 2026Pooled it
- Lifestyle interventions targeting adiposity in adults with psoriasis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026Pooled it
- Selection and reporting of usual care comparators when designing primary care trials of complex health interventions: a systematic review.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2025Pooled it
- Mapping Randomized Controlled Trials of Family- and Community-Centered Healthcare Interventions for Pediatric Asthma, Type 1 Diabetes, or Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis-A Scoping Review.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Enhancing Patient Participation in Co-Productive Decision-Making With Personal Value Sets: Clinical Trial Prototype.Journal of participatory medicine · 2026Article
- Phenobarbital as an Adjuvant to benzodiazepines when compared to Single-agent benzodiazepine Treatment (usual care) for Alcohol withdrawal syndrome in the intensive care unit (PASTA): a study protocol.Pilot and feasibility studies · 2026Article
- Comparators, consent, equipoise and estimands: ethical trade-offs in neonatal pain trials.Translational pediatrics · 2026Article
- A Systematic Review of Peer-Reviewed Studies on Preventing Sport-Related Concussion (SRC) in Adult Football (Soccer): Mapping Sparce Evidence of Rule Changes and Head-Neck Training.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Ten Healthcare Delivery Trends and Their Measurement and Methodological Implications for Cancer Health Services Research.Health services research · 2026Article
- Management of older adults consulting in GP surgery practices with back pain in UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink Aurum: population based study.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2026Article
- Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial of a culturally adapted cardiovascular dance intervention in Mapuche women with obesity.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Article
- CONSORT 2025 explanation and elaboration: updated guideline for reporting randomised trials.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2025Article
- Operationalising routinely collected patient data in research to further the pursuit of social justice and health equity: a team-based scoping review.BMC medical research methodology · 2025Article
- Scoping review of fidelity strategies used in behaviour change trials delivered in primary dental care settings.Trials · 2024Article
- Music therapy with adults in the subacute phase after stroke: A study protocol.Contemporary clinical trials communications · 2024Article
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPragmatic trials evaluating complex health interventions often compare them to usual care. This comparator should resemble care as provided in everyday practice. However, usual care can differ for the same condition, between patients and practitioners, across clinical sites and over time. Heterogeneity within a usual care arm can raise methodological and ethical issues. To address these it may be necessary to standardise what usual care entails, although doing so may compromise a trial's external validity. Currently, there is no guidance detailing how researchers should decide the content of their usual care comparators. We conducted a methodology review to summarise current thinking about what should inform this decision.
methodsMEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and PsycINFO were searched from inception to January 2022. Articles and book chapters that discussed how to identify or develop usual care comparators were included. Experts in the field were also contacted. Reference lists and forward citation searches of included articles were screened. Data were analysed using a narrative synthesis approach.
resultsOne thousand nine hundred thirty records were identified, 1611 titles and abstracts screened, 112 full texts screened, and 16 articles included in the review. Results indicated that the content of a usual care comparator should be informed by the aims of the trial, existing care practices, clinical guidelines, and characteristics of the target population. Its content should also be driven by the trial's requirements to protect participants, inform practice, and be methodologically robust, efficient, feasible and acceptable to stakeholders. When deciding the content of usual care, researchers will need to gather information about these drivers, balance tensions that might occur when responding to different trial objectives, and decide how usual care will be described and monitored in the trial. DISCUSSION: When deciding the content of a usual care arm, researchers need to understand the context in which a trial will be implemented and what the trial needs to achieve to address its aim and remain ethical. This is a complex decision-making process and trade-offs might need to be made. It also requires research and engagement with stakeholders, and therefore time and funding during the trial's design phase.
trial registrationPROSPERO CRD42022307324.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.