IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pmed00/1003294.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

TIDieR-Placebo: A guide and checklist for reporting placebo and sham controls

Author

Listed:
  • Jeremy Howick
  • Rebecca K Webster
  • Jonathan L Rees
  • Richard Turner
  • Helen Macdonald
  • Amy Price
  • Andrea W M Evers
  • Felicity Bishop
  • Gary S Collins
  • Klara Bokelmann
  • Sally Hopewell
  • André Knottnerus
  • Sarah Lamb
  • Claire Madigan
  • Vitaly Napadow
  • Andrew N Papanikitas
  • Tammy Hoffmann

Abstract

Background: Placebo or sham controls are the standard against which the benefits and harms of many active interventions are measured. Whilst the components and the method of their delivery have been shown to affect study outcomes, placebo and sham controls are rarely reported and often not matched to those of the active comparator. This can influence how beneficial or harmful the active intervention appears to be. Without adequate descriptions of placebo or sham controls, it is difficult to interpret results about the benefits and harms of active interventions within placebo-controlled trials. To overcome this problem, we developed a checklist and guide for reporting placebo or sham interventions. Methods and findings: We developed an initial list of items for the checklist by surveying experts in placebo research (n = 14). Because of the diverse contexts in which placebo or sham treatments are used in clinical research, we consulted experts in trials of drugs, surgery, physiotherapy, acupuncture, and psychological interventions. We then used a multistage online Delphi process with 53 participants to determine which items were deemed to be essential. We next convened a group of experts and stakeholders (n = 16). Our main output was a modification of the existing Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist; this allows the key features of both active interventions and placebo or sham controls to be concisely summarised by researchers. The main differences between TIDieR-Placebo and the original TIDieR are the explicit requirement to describe the setting (i.e., features of the physical environment that go beyond geographic location), the need to report whether blinding was successful (when this was measured), and the need to present the description of placebo components alongside those of the active comparator. Conclusions: We encourage TIDieR-Placebo to be used alongside TIDieR to assist the reporting of placebo or sham components and the trials in which they are used. Jeremy Howick and colleagues recommend the use of the TIDieR-Placebo checklist for reporting of sham or placebo controls in trials.

Suggested Citation

  • Jeremy Howick & Rebecca K Webster & Jonathan L Rees & Richard Turner & Helen Macdonald & Amy Price & Andrea W M Evers & Felicity Bishop & Gary S Collins & Klara Bokelmann & Sally Hopewell & André Knot, 2020. "TIDieR-Placebo: A guide and checklist for reporting placebo and sham controls," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(9), pages 1-15, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pmed00:1003294
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1003294
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1003294
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1003294&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pmed.1003294?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pmed00:1003294. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosmedicine (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.