Tailoring CONSORT-SPI to improve the reporting of smoking cessation intervention trials: An expert consensus study

Zoe Swithenbank; Alessio Bricca; Nicola Black; Jamie Hartmann Boyce; Marie Johnston; Neil Scott; Robert West; Ryan J Courtney; Shaun Treweek; Susan Michie; Marijn de Bruin

doi:10.1111/add.16340

Tailoring CONSORT-SPI to improve the reporting of smoking cessation intervention trials: An expert consensus study

Addiction. 2024 Feb;119(2):225-235. doi: 10.1111/add.16340. Epub 2023 Sep 18.

Authors

Zoe Swithenbank¹, Alessio Bricca^{2

3}, Nicola Black⁴, Jamie Hartmann Boyce⁵, Marie Johnston⁶, Neil Scott⁷, Robert West⁸, Ryan J Courtney⁴, Shaun Treweek⁹, Susan Michie¹⁰, Marijn de Bruin¹¹

Affiliations

¹ Public Health Institute, Liverpool John Moores University, Liverpool, UK.
² Research Unit for Musculoskeletal Function and Physiotherapy, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.
³ The Research Unit PROgrez, Naestved-Slagelse-Ringsted Hospitals, Slagelse, Denmark.
⁴ National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre, University of New South Wales Sydney, Kensington, Australia.
⁵ Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
⁶ Institute of Applied Health Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, Scotland, UK.
⁷ Medical Statistics Team, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, Scotland, UK.
⁸ Health Behaviour Research Centre, Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, University College London, London, UK.
⁹ Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, Scotland, UK.
¹⁰ Centre for Behaviour Change, University College London, London, UK.
¹¹ IQ Healthcare, Institute of Health Sciences, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.

Abstract

Background and aims: Inadequate reporting of smoking cessation intervention trials is common and leads to significant challenges for researchers. The aim of this study was to tailor CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials)-SPI (Social and Psychological Interventions) guidelines to improve reporting of trials of behavioural interventions to promote smoking cessation.

Method: Informed by missing data from the IC-SMOKE (Intervention and Comparison group support provided in SMOKing cEssation) systematic review project, this study used a multi-stage Delphi process to examine which items could be added or modified to improve the reporting of smoking cessation trials. The first stage involved an on-line survey of 17 international experts in smoking cessation and trial methodology voting on the importance of items for inclusion in the updated guidelines. This was followed by a face-to-face expert consensus meeting attended by 15 of these experts, where the final inclusion and exclusion of new items and modifications were agreed upon. A nine-point Likert scale was used to establish consensus, with suggested modifications requiring agreement of 75% or more. Disagreements in the first stage were presented again at the second stage for discussion and a second round of voting. Only items which reached the threshold for agreement were included.

Results: The experts agreed on the inclusion of 10 new items and the specification of 12 existing items. This included modifications that could apply to trials more widely (e.g. the rationale for the comparator), but also modifications that were very specific to smoking cessation trials (e.g. the reporting of smoking cessation outcomes).

Conclusions: A Delphi study has developed a modified CONSORT-SPI guideline (CONSORT-SPI-SMOKE) to improve the reporting of trials of behavioural interventions to promote smoking cessation.

Keywords: RCTs; expert consensus; interventions; reporting; smoking cessation; trials.

Publication types

Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

Behavior Therapy
Consensus
Humans
Research Design
Smoking Cessation*

Abstract

Publication types

MeSH terms

Grants and funding