How much does pre-trial testing influence complex intervention trials and would more testing make any difference? An email survey

BMC Medical Research Methodology

Volumn 6, Issue , 2006, Pages

  Treweek, Shaun ^a   Sullivan, Frank ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF DUNDEE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; AUTHOR; CONTROLLED STUDY; E-MAIL; HEALTH SURVEY; HUMAN; INTERVENTION STUDY; MEDICAL PRACTICE; PUBLICATION; CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); DIAGNOSTIC TEST; FEASIBILITY STUDY; HEALTH PERSONNEL ATTITUDE; PATIENT SELECTION; PROCEDURES; QUESTIONNAIRE; UTILIZATION; WRITING;

ATTITUDE OF HEALTH PERSONNEL; AUTHORSHIP; CLINICAL TRIALS AS TOPIC; DIAGNOSTIC TESTS, ROUTINE; ELECTRONIC MAIL; FEASIBILITY STUDIES; HUMANS; INTERVENTION STUDIES; PATIENT SELECTION; QUESTIONNAIRES;

EID: 33746312643     PISSN: 14712288     EISSN: 14712288     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/1471-2288-6-28     Document Type: Article

References (5)

1. Medical Research Council: A framework for development and evaluation of RCTs for complex interventions to improve health. 2000.
2. Collins LM, Murphy SA, Nair VN, Strecher VJ: A strategy for optimising and evaluating behavioral interventions. Ann Behav Med 2005, 30:65-73.
3. Eldridge S, Spencer A, Cryer C, Parsons S, Underwood M, Feder G: Why modelling a complex intervention is an important precursor to trial design: lessons from studying an intervention to reduce falls-related injuries in older people. Journal of Health Services Research & Policy 2005, 10(3):133-142.
4. Treweek S, Sullivan F: Trialists routinely over-estimate the likely effect of their intervention and underestimate the difficulty of recruitment. . submitted to the Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
5. Delemothe T: Is that it? How online articles have changed over the past five years. BMJ 2002, 325:1475-1478.