|Appears in Collections:||Faculty of Health Sciences and Sport Journal Articles|
|Peer Review Status:||Refereed|
|Title:||The PRECIS-2 tool has good interrater reliability and modest discriminant validity (Forthcoming/Available Online)|
Sullivan, Frank M
Donnan, Peter T
Krishnan, Jerry A
|Keywords:||Randomized controlled trials|
Clinical trial methodology
Validity and reliability
Face validity Pragmatic clinical trial
|Citation:||Loudon K, Zwarenstein M, Sullivan FM, Donnan PT, Gagyor I, Hobbelen H, Althabe F, Krishnan JA & Treweek S (2017) The PRECIS-2 tool has good interrater reliability and modest discriminant validity (Forthcoming/Available Online), Journal of Clinical Epidemiology.|
|Abstract:||Objective PRECIS - 2 is a tool that could improve design insight for trialists. Our aim was to validate the PRECIS - 2 tool, unlike its predecessor, testing the discriminant validity and inter-rater reliability. Study design and Setting Over 80 international trialists, methodologists, clinicians and policymakers created PRECIS - 2 helping to ensure face and content validity. The inter-rater reliability of PREC IS - 2 was measured using 19 experienced trialists who used PRECIS - 2 to score a diverse sample of 15 RCT protocols. Discriminant validity was tested with two raters to independently determine if the trial protocols were more pragmatic or more explanatory, with scores from the 19 raters for the 15 trials as predictors of pragmatism. Results Inter-rater reliability was generally good, with seven out of nine domains having an ICC over 0.65.Flexibility (Adherence) and Recruitmenthad wide confidence intervals but raters found these difficult to rate and wanted more information. Each of the nine PRECIS - 2 domains could be used to differentiate between trials taking more pragmatic or more explanatory approaches with better than chance discrimination for all domains. Conclusion We have assessed the validity and reliability of PRECIS - 2. An elaboration paper and website provide guidance to help future users of the tool which is continuing to be tested by trial teams, systematic reviewers and funders.|
|Rights:||This item has been embargoed for a period. During the embargo please use the Request a Copy feature at the foot of the Repository record to request a copy directly from the author. You can only request a copy if you wish to use this work for your own research or private study.|
|Loudon_etal_JournalofClinicalEpidemiology_2017.pdf||689.95 kB||Adobe PDF||Under Embargo until 9/6/2018 Request a copy|
Note: If any of the files in this item are currently embargoed, you can request a copy directly from the author by clicking the padlock icon above. However, this facility is dependent on the depositor still being contactable at their original email address.
This item is protected by original copyright
Items in the Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.
If you believe that any material held in STORRE infringes copyright, please contact firstname.lastname@example.org providing details and we will remove the Work from public display in STORRE and investigate your claim.