IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pmed00/1004589.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

SPIRIT 2025 statement: Updated guideline for protocols of randomised trials

Author

Listed:
  • An-Wen Chan
  • Isabelle Boutron
  • Sally Hopewell
  • David Moher
  • Kenneth F Schulz
  • Gary S Collins
  • Ruth Tunn
  • Rakesh Aggarwal
  • Michael Berkwits
  • Jesse A Berlin
  • Nita Bhandari
  • Nancy J Butcher
  • Marion K Campbell
  • Runcie C W Chidebe
  • Diana R Elbourne
  • Andrew J Farmer
  • Dean A Fergusson
  • Robert M Golub
  • Steven N Goodman
  • Tammy C Hoffmann
  • John P A Ioannidis
  • Brennan C Kahan
  • Rachel L Knowles
  • Sarah E Lamb
  • Steff Lewis
  • Elizabeth Loder
  • Martin Offringa
  • Philippe Ravaud
  • Dawn P Richards
  • Frank W Rockhold
  • David L Schriger
  • Nandi L Siegfried
  • Sophie Staniszewska
  • Rod S Taylor
  • Lehana Thabane
  • David J Torgerson
  • Sunita Vohra
  • Ian R White
  • Asbjørn Hróbjartsson

Abstract

Importance: The protocol of a randomised trial is the foundation for study planning, conduct, reporting, and external review. However, trial protocols vary in their completeness and often do not address key elements of design and conduct. The SPIRIT (Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials) statement was first published in 2013 as guidance to improve the completeness of trial protocols. Periodic updates incorporating the latest evidence and best practices are needed to ensure that the guidance remains relevant to users. Objective: To systematically update the SPIRIT recommendations for minimum items to address in the protocol of a randomised trial. Design: We completed a scoping review and developed a project specific database of empirical and theoretical evidence to generate a list of potential changes to the SPIRIT 2013 checklist. The list was enriched with recommendations provided by lead authors of existing SPIRIT/CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) extensions (Harms, Outcomes, Non-pharmacological Treatment) and other reporting guidelines (TIDieR). The potential modifications were rated in a three-round Delphi survey followed by a consensus meeting. Findings: Overall, 317 individuals participated in the Delphi consensus process and 30 experts attended the consensus meeting. The process led to the addition of two new protocol items, revision to five items, deletion/merger of five items, and integration of key items from other relevant reporting guidelines. Notable changes include a new open science section, additional emphasis on the assessment of harms and description of interventions and comparators, and a new item on how patients and the public will be involved in trial design, conduct, and reporting. The updated SPIRIT 2025 statement consists of an evidence-based checklist of 34 minimum items to address in a trial protocol, along with a diagram illustrating the schedule of enrolment, interventions, and assessments for trial participants. To facilitate implementation, we also developed an expanded version of the SPIRIT 2025 checklist and an accompanying explanation and elaboration document. Conclusions and relevance: Widespread endorsement and adherence to the updated SPIRIT 2025 statement have the potential to enhance the transparency and completeness of trial protocols for the benefit of investigators, trial participants, patients, funders, research ethics committees, journals, trial registries, policymakers, regulators, and other reviewers. A complete, transparent, and accessible protocol is critical for the planning, conduct, reporting, and external review of randomised trialsThe SPIRIT (Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials) 2025 statement provides guidance on items to address in trial protocols, reflecting methodological advances and feedback from usersThe SPIRIT 2025 statement consists of a checklist of 34 minimum items; a diagram illustrating the schedule of enrolment, interventions, and assessments; and an expanded checklist that details the critical elements of each checklist itemResearch teams, sponsors, editors, funders, and research ethics committees/institutional review boards should use and endorse SPIRIT 2025 to promote transparent protocol content

Suggested Citation

  • An-Wen Chan & Isabelle Boutron & Sally Hopewell & David Moher & Kenneth F Schulz & Gary S Collins & Ruth Tunn & Rakesh Aggarwal & Michael Berkwits & Jesse A Berlin & Nita Bhandari & Nancy J Butcher & , 2025. "SPIRIT 2025 statement: Updated guideline for protocols of randomised trials," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 22(4), pages 1-15, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pmed00:1004589
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1004589
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1004589
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1004589&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pmed.1004589?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
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Alison Farrell & On Behalf of the PLOS Medicine Editors, 2025. "Improving transparency in clinical trial reporting," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 22(4), pages 1-3, April.

    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:pmed00:1004589. 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.