TREND CHECKLIST

JURNAL

1. VALIDATION AND SCORING OF THE GREEK VERSION OF THE

STRATEGIC AND CLINICAL QUALITY INDICATORS IN
POSTOPERATIVE PAIN MANAGEMENT (SCQIPP) QUESTIONNAIRE
Sarakatsianou C., Baloyiannis I., Perivoliotis K., Kolonia K., Georgopoulou S.,
Tzovaras G. (2022). Validation and scoring of the greek version of the strategic
and clinical quality indicators in postoperative pain management (SCQIPP)
questionnaire. (2022). Journal of PeriAnasthesia Nursing, 000: 1-7.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jopan.2022.03.005
2. EXCLUSIVE AMBULATORY MANAGEMENT OF SPONTANEOUS
PNEUMOTHORAX WITH PIGTAIL CATHETERS, A PROSPECTIVE
MULTICENTRIC STUDY
Sale A., Sohier L., Campion M., Le Ho R., Bazin Y., Gangloff C., Kerjouan M.,
Delatour B., Oger E., Jouneau S. (2019). Exclusive ambulatory management of
spontaneous pneumothorax with pigtail catheters, a prospective multicentric
study. Respiratory Medicine, 166: 1-6. doi.org/10.1016/j.rmed.2020.105931
3. UTERINE MASSAGE TO REDUCE BLOOD LOSS BEFORE DELIVERY
OF THE PLACENTA IN CAESAREAN SECTION: A RETROSPECTIVE
COHORT STUDY
Zhang, S., Fu X. (2021). Uterine massage to reduce blood loss before delivery of
the placenta in caesarean section: a retrospective cohort study. Z Geburtshilfe
Neonatol, 225 (5): 428-431. doi: 10.1055/a-1386-6155
 PAPER ITEM DESCRIPTOR REPORTED PAGE
SECTION/TOPIC NO.  Jurnal 1  Jurnal 2  Jurnal 3
TITLE and
ABSTRACT
Title and Abstract 1  Information on how units were allocated to  #1  #1  #1
interventions
 Structured abstract recommended  #1  #1  #1

 Information on target population or study  #1  #1  #1

sample
INTRODUCTION

Background 2  Scientific background and explanation of  #1  #1  #1

rationale
 Theories used in designing behavioral  #1  #1, #2  #1
interventions
METHODS

Participants 3  Eligibility criteria for participants,  #2  #2  #2

including criteria at different levels in

recruitment/sampling plan (e.g., cities,
 clinics, subjects)

Method of recruitment (e.g., referral, self-  #2  #2  #2

selection), including the sampling method
if a systematic sampling plan was
implemented

Recruitment setting -  #2  #2

Settings and locations where the data were  #2  #2  #2

collected

Interventions 4  Details of the interventions intended for  #2  #2  #2

each study condition and how and when
they were actually administered,
specifically including:
o Content: what was given? -  #2  #2

o Delivery method: how was the content -  #2  #2

given?

o Unit of delivery: how were subjects - -  #2

grouped during delivery?
 o Deliverer: who delivered the -  #2  #2
intervention?

o Setting: where was the intervention -  #2  #2

delivered?

o Exposure quantity and duration: how -  #2  #2

many sessions or episodes or events were
intended to be delivered? How long were
they intended to last?
o Time span: how long was it intended to -  #2  #2
take to deliver the intervention to each
unit?
o Activities to increase compliance or - - -
adherence (e.g., incentives)
Objectives 5  Specific objectives and hypotheses - - -

Outcomes 6  Clearly defined primary and secondary  #2, #3  #3 -

outcome measures
 Methods used to collect data and any -  #3  #2
methods used to enhance the quality of
measurements
  Information on validated instruments such -  #3  #2
as psychometric and biometric properties

Sample size 7  How sample size was determined and, -  #3  #2

when applicable, explanation of any
interim analyses and stopping rules

Assignment method 8  Unit of assignment (the unit being assigned -  #3  #2

to study condition, e.g., individual, group,
community)
 Method used to assign units to study -  #3 -
conditions, including details of any
restriction (e.g., blocking, stratification,
minimization)
 Inclusion of aspects employed to help - - -
minimize potential bias induced due to
non-randomization (e.g., matching)
Blinding (masking) 9  Whether or not participants, those - - -
administering the interventions, and those
assessing the outcomes were blinded to
study condition assignment; if so, statement
regarding how the blinding was
 accomplished and how it was assessed

Unit of Analysis 10  Description of the smallest unit that is  #2  #2  #3

being analyzed to assess intervention
effects (e.g., individual, group, or
community)

 If the unit of analysis differs from the unit  #3 - -

of assignment, the analytical method used
to account for this (e.g., adjusting the
standard error estimates by the design
effect or using multilevel analysis)

Statistical Methods 11  Statistical methods used to compare study  #2  #2  #2

groups for primary methods outcome(s),
including complex methods for correlated
data
 Statistical methods used for additional  #2  #2  #2
analyses, such as subgroup analyses and
adjusted analysis
 Methods for imputing missing data, if used - -

 Statistical software or programs used  #2  #3  #2

RESULTS

Participant flow 12  Flow of participants through each stage of -  #4 -

the study: enrollment, assignment,
allocation and intervention exposure,
follow-up, analysis (a diagram is strongly
recommended)
o Enrollment: the numbers of participants -  #4  #2
screened for eligibility, found to be
eligible or not eligible, declined to be
enrolled, and enrolled in the study
o Assignment: the numbers of participants  #2  #4  #2
assigned to a study condition

o Allocation and intervention exposure: the -  #4  #2

number of participants assigned to each
study condition and the number of
participants who received each
intervention
o Follow-up: the number of participants -  #4 -
who completed the follow-up or did not
 complete the follow-up (i.e., lost to
follow-up), by study condition
o Analysis: the number of participants -  #3  #2
included in or excluded from the main
analysis, by study condition

 Description of protocol deviations from - - -

study as planned, along with reasons

Recruitment 13  Dates defining the periods of recruitment -  #2  #2

and follow-up

Baseline data 14  Baseline demographic and clinical  #3  #3  #2

characteristics of participants in each study
condition
 Baseline characteristics for each study  #4 -  #3
condition relevant to specific disease
prevention research
 Baseline comparisons of those lost to - - -
follow-up and those retained, overall and
by study condition
 Comparison between study population at - - -
baseline and target population of interest
Baseline 15  Data on study group equivalence at  #4 - -
equivalence baseline and statistical methods used to
control for baseline differences

Numbers analyzed 16  Number of participants (denominator) -  #2  #3

included in each analysis for each study
condition, particularly when the
denominators change for different
outcomes; statement of the results in
absolute numbers when feasible

 Indication of whether the analysis strategy -  #2 -

was “intention to treat” or, if not,
description of how non-compliers were
treated in the analyses

Outcomes and 17  For each primary and secondary outcome, a -  #3  #3

estimation summary of results for each estimation
study condition, and the estimated effect
size and a confidence interval to indicate
the precision

 Inclusion of null and negative findings - - -

  Inclusion of results from testing pre- - - -
specified causal pathways through which
the intervention was intended to operate, if
any

Ancillary analyses 18  Summary of other analyses performed,  #4 -  #3

including subgroup or restricted analyses,
indicating which are pre-specified or
exploratory

Adverse events 19  Summary of all important adverse events or - - -

unintended effects in each study condition
(including summary measures, effect size
estimates, and confidence intervals)
DISCUSSION

Interpretation 20  Interpretation of the results, taking into  #6  #3  #4

account study hypotheses, sources of
potential bias, imprecision of measures,
multiplicative analyses, and other
limitations or weaknesses of the study

 Discussion of results taking into account  #5  #3  #3

the mechanism by which the intervention
 was intended to work (causal pathways) or
alternative mechanisms or explanations
 Discussion of the success of and barriers to -  #3  #3
implementing the intervention, fidelity of
implementation
 Discussion of research, programmatic, or -  #3 -
policy implications

Generalizability 21  Generalizability (external validity) of the - -  #2

trial findings, taking into account the study
population, the characteristics of the
intervention, length of follow-up,
incentives, compliance rates, specific
sites/settings involved in the study, and
other contextual issues

Overall evidence 22  General interpretation of the results in the  #6  #5  #3, #4

context of current evidence and current
theory