Skip to main content
. 2020 Jul 8;21:620. doi: 10.1186/s13063-020-04440-w

Table 3.

Focus of the outcome reporting recommendations (n = 1758) identified within 244 eligible documents

N (%)
Trial document typea
 Trial reports 781 (44.4)
 Trial protocols 758 (43.1)
 General trial reporting 229 (13.0)
 Ethics boards documents for trial submissions 21 (1.2)
 Study proposal for a trial in grant application(s) 1 (0.06)
Trial type
 No specific focus explicitly stated 1369 (77.9)
 All trials 124 (7.1)
 Specific trial focusa 265 (15.1)
  Phasea 102 (5.8)
   Pilot/feasibility 33 (1.9)
   II 45 (2.6)
   III 64 (3.6)
  Designa 102 (5.8)
N-of-1 44 (2.5)
   Cluster 16 (0.9)
   Non-inferiority 14 (0.8)
   Equivalence 11 (0.6)
   Within person 10 (0.6)
   Parallel 9 (0.5)
   Crossover 6 (0.3)
   Adaptive 6 (0.3)
   Superiority 5 (0.3)
   Pragmatic 3 (0.2)
Outcomes
 No specific focus explicitly stated 911 (51.8)
 All outcomes 11 (0.6)
 Specific outcome focusa 836 (47.6)
  Outcome classificationa 469 (26.7)
   Primary 458 (26.1)
   Secondary 326 (18.5)
   “Important” 7 (0.4)
   Tertiary/exploratory 6 (0.3)
  Outcome typea 474 (27.0)
   Patient-reported outcome 288 (16.4)
   Harm/adverse event 116 (6.6)
   Biological marker 41 (2.3)
   Efficacy outcome 33 (1.9)
   Composite outcome 13 (0.7)
   Survival/time-to-event outcome 11 (0.6)
   Surrogate outcome 8 (0.5)
   Clinician-reported outcome 7 (0.4)
   Continuous outcome 4 (0.2)
   Binary outcome 3 (0.2)
   “Unintended” outcome 1 (0.06)

aNot mutually exclusive