Skip to main content
. 2022 Oct 1;17:65. doi: 10.1186/s13012-022-01238-z

Table 2.

Description of the included 227 randomized controlled trials: characteristics, aims, and outcomes

Characteristics Aim and rationale Outcomes
Settinga n (%) Aima n (%) Outcome categoriesa n (%)
 Primary care — outpatient 149 (66%) Abandon 0 (0%) Health outcomes 58 (26%)
 Primary care — inpatient 3 (1%) Reduce 225 (99%) Low-value care use 63 (28%)
 Secondary/tertiary care — outpatient 28 (12%) Replace 42 (19%) Appropriate care use 34 (15%)
 Secondary/tertiary care — inpatient 40 (18%) Unclear 2 (1%) Total volume of care 194 (85%)
 Other 22 (10%) Rationalea Intention to reduce the use of low-value care
Randomization unit Evidence suggests little or no benefit from treatment or diagnostic test 115 (51%) 17 (7%)
 Cluster 145 (64%) Measured costsa
 Individual 82 (36%) Evidence suggests another treatment is more effective or less harmful 13 (6%) Intervention costs 20 (9%)
Medical interventiona Healthcare costs 45 (20%)
 Prevention 9 (4%) Evidence suggests more harms than benefits for the patient or community 145 (64%) Reported effectiveness
 Diagnostic imaging 29 (13%) (Some) desired effect 186 (82%)
 Laboratory tests 28 (12%) Cost-effectiveness 70 (31%) No desired effect 41 (18%)
 Drug treatment 163 (72%) Patient(s) do not want the intervention 2 (1%) Theoretical basis and tailoringa
 Operative treatments 7 (3%) Theory-based interventions 48 (21%)
 Rehabilitation 2 (1%) Not reported/unclear 20 (9%) Tailored interventions 40 (18%)
 Other 7 (3%) Intervention complexityb
Target groupa Multicomponent 152 (67%)
 Public 5 (2%) Simple 84 (37%)
 Patients 42 (19%)
 Caregivers 17 (7%)
 Physicians 193 (85%)
 Nurses 37 (16%)
 Other 23 (10%)

aOne trial could be categorized into several categories, and therefore, the sum of percentages may be over 100%

bNine trials had multiple treatment arms and tested both simple and multicomponent interventions. Simple intervention was defined as having one intervention category with or without tailoring