Article type
Year
Abstract
Background: Exercise is effective, integral to health and important for people with chronic health conditions. A systematic review of 73 reviews of exercise for chronic conditions reported suboptimal descriptions of interventions and concluded that this hinders replication and implementation. Without explicit descriptions, clinicians, patients and researchers remain unclear about effective programs.
Objectives: The aim was to develop a standardised method for reporting key and essential exercise program details evaluated in clinical trials.
Methods: A modified Delphi technique was used to gain consensus among an international panel of experts identified by systematic review authorship, international research and clinical profile and peer referral. An online survey of 42 questions was developed from our systematic review. Experts from 14 countries indicated item importance on a scale of 0 to 10 and gave free text comments. We used three sequential rounds of anonymous online questionnaires. The final template will be piloted on a random sample of systematic reviews and RCTs of exercise. Modifications will be made and final approval sought from the expert panel.
Results: There were 57/137 respondents in Round 1 (42%), 10 items were accepted in the original format and 14 reformatted for Round 2 which had 53/57 respondents (93%). Sixteen items were distributed for Round 3 which had 49/54 respondents (91%). The final core set was 16 items and 520 comments were thematically analysed. The final template was modeled according to the CONSORT Statement and TIDieR Checklist. An Explanation and Elaboration Statement and implementation strategies such as journal endorsement for manuscript submission and peer-review and CONSORT Item 5 extension are planned. The CERT checklist is registered on the Equator Network.
Conclusions: The CERT checklist will improve explicit reporting of exercise interventions in clinical trials; increase clinical uptake of effective exercise programs; enable research replication; improve patient outcomes; and increase research impact on health.
Objectives: The aim was to develop a standardised method for reporting key and essential exercise program details evaluated in clinical trials.
Methods: A modified Delphi technique was used to gain consensus among an international panel of experts identified by systematic review authorship, international research and clinical profile and peer referral. An online survey of 42 questions was developed from our systematic review. Experts from 14 countries indicated item importance on a scale of 0 to 10 and gave free text comments. We used three sequential rounds of anonymous online questionnaires. The final template will be piloted on a random sample of systematic reviews and RCTs of exercise. Modifications will be made and final approval sought from the expert panel.
Results: There were 57/137 respondents in Round 1 (42%), 10 items were accepted in the original format and 14 reformatted for Round 2 which had 53/57 respondents (93%). Sixteen items were distributed for Round 3 which had 49/54 respondents (91%). The final core set was 16 items and 520 comments were thematically analysed. The final template was modeled according to the CONSORT Statement and TIDieR Checklist. An Explanation and Elaboration Statement and implementation strategies such as journal endorsement for manuscript submission and peer-review and CONSORT Item 5 extension are planned. The CERT checklist is registered on the Equator Network.
Conclusions: The CERT checklist will improve explicit reporting of exercise interventions in clinical trials; increase clinical uptake of effective exercise programs; enable research replication; improve patient outcomes; and increase research impact on health.