Do we really know what they were testing? Incomplete reporting of interventions in randomised trials of upper limb therapies in unilateral cerebral palsy.
Most RCTs for CP arm therapy leave out the details you need to copy the intervention.
01Research in Context
What this study did
The team hunted every randomized trial that tested arm or hand therapy for kids with unilateral cerebral palsy.
They used the TIDieR checklist to see if each paper told readers exactly what the therapists did.
They scored 12 items such as dose, setting, materials, and who gave the therapy.
What they found
Not one trial reported every TIDieR item.
Control groups got the worst descriptions; you could not copy the study if you tried.
Missing details block replication and slow real-world use.
How this fits with other research
de Leeuw et al. (2024) ran a new CP trial and also left out key details; the 2016 review shows this habit is old and still alive.
Oliver et al. (2002) warned that consent hurdles stall RCTs in ID services; Leanne et al. add that even finished trials hide their methods.
Houwen et al. (2014) proved motor training can help severe ID, but poor reporting keeps us from knowing which parts work.
Together the papers say: we can prove an intervention helps, yet still fail to tell clinicians how to do it.
Why it matters
You need the recipe to cook the meal. When trials skip dose, materials, or trainer type, BCBAs cannot repeat the therapy or train staff. Push authors for full TIDieR tables before you add any CP upper-limb study to your treatment plan.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Email the authors of your favorite CP trial and ask for the TIDieR worksheet before you use it in therapy.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
BACKGROUND: Incomplete reporting of components of interventions limits uptake of evidence into clinical practice. AIMS: To evaluate the completeness of reporting of research and control interventions in randomised trials of upper limb therapies for children with unilateral cerebral palsy. METHODS AND PROCEDURES: Sixty randomized trials were included, encompassing 60 research and 68 control interventions. Using the 12-item Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist, two reviewers independently rated intervention and control descriptions. OUTCOMES AND RESULTS: When using 50% of studies as the benchmark, five of the 12 TIDieR items for the research intervention, eight of the 12 items for the control intervention and 11 of 12 items for "usual care" interventions were inadequately reported. Procedures used to deliver the research intervention were adequately reported for 63% of studies. Materials were used in 94% of research interventions, yet only 27% provided details to access/replicate materials. Training materials for interventionists were used in 38% of trials, 10 (17%) had procedure manuals, yet only 3 reported details to access materials. The location where the research intervention was provided was detailed in 65% of studies. Reporting of all items was poorer for the control intervention. CONCLUSIONS: No study adequately reported all elements on the TIDieR checklist. Details crucial for replication of interventions and interpretation of results were missing. Authors, reviewers, and editors all have a responsibility to improve the quality of intervention reporting in published trials. The TIDieR guide is a potential solution, helping to structure accounts of interventions.
Research in developmental disabilities, 2016 · doi:10.1016/j.ridd.2016.09.018