ArticleJournal of advanced nursing2025
Evaluating Intervention Reporting in Nursing Journal RCTs Using the TIDieR Checklist: A Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in Journal of advanced nursing, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Transparency in positive airway pressure therapy trials: an evaluation of reporting quality.Journal of comparative effectiveness research · 2026Article
- Quasi-experimental studies in theJournal of Korean biological nursing science · 2025Review
- Improving Rural Healthcare in Mobile Clinics: Real-Time, Live Data Entry into the Electronic Medical Record Using a Satellite Internet Connection.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimTo assess the completeness of intervention reporting in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published in nursing journals based on the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist.
designA cross-sectional study.
methodsRCTs published in English in nursing journals between January 2022 and December 2022 were identified through PubMed. Title- and abstract-screening were undertaken independently by two reviewers to select eligible trials, from which data were extracted. Reports of interventions were likewise independently evaluated based on the TIDieR checklist. Binary logistic regression analysis was performed to investigate potential predictors for the compliance of TIDieR.
resultsOur analysis included 303 eligible trials, which generally adhered to most items on the TIDieR checklist, though adherence varied across the trials. Slightly fewer than half of the trials demonstrated good reporting quality. Poor reporting was associated in areas such as modifications, tailoring, and the type of locations where the intervention occurred. Additionally, suboptimal reporting on intervention adherence was noted. Compliance with TIDieR was found to be influenced by factors such as funding availability and the journal's ranking.
conclusionsOur study revealed suboptimal reporting of the TIDieR items in RCTs published in nursing journals. More rigorous adherence to the TIDieR checklist is needed to improve the quality of intervention reporting. Additionally, comparing adherence before and after the implementation of TIDieR may be considered in future investigations. IMPACT: This paper represents the first study to appraise the reporting quality of RCTs in nursing journals based on the TIDieR checklist. Evidence of suboptimal compliance of RCTs to the TIDieR checklist items is presented. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTIONS: No patient or public contribution applied.
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.