The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Better reporting of interventions: template for intervention description and replication (TIDieR) checklist and guide

Better reporting of interventions: template for intervention description and replication (TIDieR) checklist and guide
Better reporting of interventions: template for intervention description and replication (TIDieR) checklist and guide

Without a complete published description of interventions, clinicians and patients cannot reliably implement interventions that are shown to be useful, and other researchers cannot replicate or build on research findings. The quality of description of interventions in publications, however, is remarkably poor. To improve the completeness of reporting, and ultimately the replicability, of interventions, an international group of experts and stakeholders developed the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist and guide. The process involved a literature review for relevant checklists and research, a Delphi survey of an international panel of experts to guide item selection, and a face to face panel meeting. The resultant 12 item TIDieR checklist (brief name, why, what (materials), what (procedure), who provided, how, where, when and how much, tailoring, modifications, how well (planned), how well (actual)) is an extension of the CONSORT 2010 statement (item 5) and the SPIRIT 2013 statement (item 11). While the emphasis of the checklist is on trials, the guidance is intended to apply across all evaluative study designs. This paper presents the TIDieR checklist and guide, with an explanation and elaboration for each item, and examples of good reporting. The TIDieR checklist and guide should improve the reporting of interventions and make it easier for authors to structure accounts of their interventions, reviewers and editors to assess the descriptions, and readers to use the information.

Biomedical Research, Checklist, Clinical Trials as Topic, Delphi Technique, Humans, Program Evaluation, Reproducibility of Results, Research Design, Research Report, Consensus Development Conference, Guideline, Journal Article, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
0959-8138
g1687
Hoffmann, Tammy C
01a2745e-b451-4e7e-85dd-db0e51bcc3be
Glasziou, Paul P
c1890d0d-7bb1-45c9-9841-5a38c834eac2
Boutron, Isabelle
f88ca347-cf0a-4c6b-a16e-4ad68c78d904
Milne, Ruairidh
bd90470b-bba2-49a1-aa12-f1319d78afc2
Perera, Rafael
e99a2819-c326-461c-8526-980b64458c22
Moher, David
d6874c09-5b51-4b18-a921-e1ec411a2b91
Altman, Douglas G
f0d739a4-dc94-44d1-a497-603a3ed7d7e6
Barbour, Virginia
a3cfa28d-6015-42d4-938e-d02e4800321f
Macdonald, Helen
47dbfdc1-9a1e-4d17-ba40-52d33bfebc10
Johnston, Marie
97013367-b846-4113-b4e1-eeeb0ede2429
Lamb, Sarah E
210b9bca-47e9-4471-9fbf-6a82c35a98e2
Dixon-Woods, Mary
fab3d555-3223-46f5-96ee-73ce7dafccce
McCulloch, Peter
437a9c94-58ea-46c2-bca0-5eb18226fbfa
Wyatt, Jeremy C
8361be5a-fca9-4acf-b3d2-7ce04126f468
Chan, An-Wen
0e534e40-771d-4519-af40-e1ad76641462
Michie, Susan
47e0a907-79cb-47d5-b5a9-82d2afe1747a
Hoffmann, Tammy C
01a2745e-b451-4e7e-85dd-db0e51bcc3be
Glasziou, Paul P
c1890d0d-7bb1-45c9-9841-5a38c834eac2
Boutron, Isabelle
f88ca347-cf0a-4c6b-a16e-4ad68c78d904
Milne, Ruairidh
bd90470b-bba2-49a1-aa12-f1319d78afc2
Perera, Rafael
e99a2819-c326-461c-8526-980b64458c22
Moher, David
d6874c09-5b51-4b18-a921-e1ec411a2b91
Altman, Douglas G
f0d739a4-dc94-44d1-a497-603a3ed7d7e6
Barbour, Virginia
a3cfa28d-6015-42d4-938e-d02e4800321f
Macdonald, Helen
47dbfdc1-9a1e-4d17-ba40-52d33bfebc10
Johnston, Marie
97013367-b846-4113-b4e1-eeeb0ede2429
Lamb, Sarah E
210b9bca-47e9-4471-9fbf-6a82c35a98e2
Dixon-Woods, Mary
fab3d555-3223-46f5-96ee-73ce7dafccce
McCulloch, Peter
437a9c94-58ea-46c2-bca0-5eb18226fbfa
Wyatt, Jeremy C
8361be5a-fca9-4acf-b3d2-7ce04126f468
Chan, An-Wen
0e534e40-771d-4519-af40-e1ad76641462
Michie, Susan
47e0a907-79cb-47d5-b5a9-82d2afe1747a

Hoffmann, Tammy C, Glasziou, Paul P, Boutron, Isabelle, Milne, Ruairidh, Perera, Rafael, Moher, David, Altman, Douglas G, Barbour, Virginia, Macdonald, Helen, Johnston, Marie, Lamb, Sarah E, Dixon-Woods, Mary, McCulloch, Peter, Wyatt, Jeremy C, Chan, An-Wen and Michie, Susan (2014) Better reporting of interventions: template for intervention description and replication (TIDieR) checklist and guide. BMJ, 348, g1687.

Record type: Article

Abstract

Without a complete published description of interventions, clinicians and patients cannot reliably implement interventions that are shown to be useful, and other researchers cannot replicate or build on research findings. The quality of description of interventions in publications, however, is remarkably poor. To improve the completeness of reporting, and ultimately the replicability, of interventions, an international group of experts and stakeholders developed the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist and guide. The process involved a literature review for relevant checklists and research, a Delphi survey of an international panel of experts to guide item selection, and a face to face panel meeting. The resultant 12 item TIDieR checklist (brief name, why, what (materials), what (procedure), who provided, how, where, when and how much, tailoring, modifications, how well (planned), how well (actual)) is an extension of the CONSORT 2010 statement (item 5) and the SPIRIT 2013 statement (item 11). While the emphasis of the checklist is on trials, the guidance is intended to apply across all evaluative study designs. This paper presents the TIDieR checklist and guide, with an explanation and elaboration for each item, and examples of good reporting. The TIDieR checklist and guide should improve the reporting of interventions and make it easier for authors to structure accounts of their interventions, reviewers and editors to assess the descriptions, and readers to use the information.

This record has no associated files available for download.

More information

Published date: 7 March 2014
Keywords: Biomedical Research, Checklist, Clinical Trials as Topic, Delphi Technique, Humans, Program Evaluation, Reproducibility of Results, Research Design, Research Report, Consensus Development Conference, Guideline, Journal Article, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Organisations: Wessex Institute

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 408799
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/408799
ISSN: 0959-8138
PURE UUID: 42fd4371-6dc7-4c55-b832-beedc062da54
ORCID for Ruairidh Milne: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0002-5117-4380
ORCID for Jeremy C Wyatt: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0001-7008-1473

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 28 May 2017 04:01
Last modified: 28 Apr 2022 02:14

Export record

Contributors

Author: Tammy C Hoffmann
Author: Paul P Glasziou
Author: Isabelle Boutron
Author: Ruairidh Milne ORCID iD
Author: Rafael Perera
Author: David Moher
Author: Douglas G Altman
Author: Virginia Barbour
Author: Helen Macdonald
Author: Marie Johnston
Author: Sarah E Lamb
Author: Mary Dixon-Woods
Author: Peter McCulloch
Author: Jeremy C Wyatt ORCID iD
Author: An-Wen Chan
Author: Susan Michie

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×