Bias due to MEasurement Reactions In Trials to improve health (MERIT): protocol for research to develop MRC guidance

Abstract Background There is now clear systematic review evidence that measurement can affect the people being measured; much of this evidence focusses on how asking people to complete a questionnaire can result in changes in behaviour. Changes in measured behaviour and other outcomes due to this re...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Lisa M. Miles, Diana Elbourne, Andrew Farmer, Martin Gulliford, Louise Locock, Jim McCambridge, Stephen Sutton, David P. French
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2018-11-01
Series:Trials
Subjects:
Online Access:http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s13063-018-3017-5
id doaj-39af71c27ccb45e889c7f04918b02f48
record_format Article
spelling doaj-39af71c27ccb45e889c7f04918b02f482020-11-25T00:46:04ZengBMCTrials1745-62152018-11-011911810.1186/s13063-018-3017-5Bias due to MEasurement Reactions In Trials to improve health (MERIT): protocol for research to develop MRC guidanceLisa M. Miles0Diana Elbourne1Andrew Farmer2Martin Gulliford3Louise Locock4Jim McCambridge5Stephen Sutton6David P. French7Manchester Centre for Health Psychology, University of ManchesterDepartment of Medical Statistics, London School of Hygiene and Tropical MedicineNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of OxfordSchool of Population Health and Environmental Sciences, King’s College LondonHealth Services Research Unit, University of AberdeenDepartment of Health Sciences, University of YorkDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, University of CambridgeManchester Centre for Health Psychology, University of ManchesterAbstract Background There is now clear systematic review evidence that measurement can affect the people being measured; much of this evidence focusses on how asking people to complete a questionnaire can result in changes in behaviour. Changes in measured behaviour and other outcomes due to this reactivity may introduce bias in otherwise well-conducted randomised controlled trials (RCTs), yielding incorrect estimates of intervention effects. Despite this, measurement reactivity is not currently adequately considered in risk of bias frameworks. The present research aims to produce a set of guidance statements on how best to avoid or minimise bias due to measurement reactivity in studies of interventions to improve health, with a particular focus on bias in RCTs. Methods The MERIT study consists of a series of systematic and rapid reviews, a Delphi study and an expert workshop to develop guidance on how to minimise bias in trials due to measurement reactivity. An existing systematic review on question-behaviour effects on health-related behaviours will be updated and three new rapid reviews will be conducted to identify (1) existing guidance on measurement reactivity; (2) systematic reviews of studies that have quantified the effects of measurement on outcomes relating to behaviour and affective outcomes in health and non-health contexts and (3) trials that have investigated the effects of objective measurements of behaviour on concurrent or subsequent behaviour itself. A Delphi procedure will be used to combine the views of experts with a view to reaching agreement on the scope of the guidance statements. Finally, a workshop will be held in autumn 2018, with the aim of producing a set of guidance statements that will form the central part of new MRC guidance on how best to avoid bias due to measurement reactivity in studies of interventions to improve health. Discussion Our ambition is to produce MRC guidance on measurement reactions in trials which will be used by future trial researchers, leading to the development of trials that are less likely to be at risk of bias.http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s13063-018-3017-5MeasurementReactivityMeasurement reactionsGuidanceTrialsBias
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Lisa M. Miles
Diana Elbourne
Andrew Farmer
Martin Gulliford
Louise Locock
Jim McCambridge
Stephen Sutton
David P. French
spellingShingle Lisa M. Miles
Diana Elbourne
Andrew Farmer
Martin Gulliford
Louise Locock
Jim McCambridge
Stephen Sutton
David P. French
Bias due to MEasurement Reactions In Trials to improve health (MERIT): protocol for research to develop MRC guidance
Trials
Measurement
Reactivity
Measurement reactions
Guidance
Trials
Bias
author_facet Lisa M. Miles
Diana Elbourne
Andrew Farmer
Martin Gulliford
Louise Locock
Jim McCambridge
Stephen Sutton
David P. French
author_sort Lisa M. Miles
title Bias due to MEasurement Reactions In Trials to improve health (MERIT): protocol for research to develop MRC guidance
title_short Bias due to MEasurement Reactions In Trials to improve health (MERIT): protocol for research to develop MRC guidance
title_full Bias due to MEasurement Reactions In Trials to improve health (MERIT): protocol for research to develop MRC guidance
title_fullStr Bias due to MEasurement Reactions In Trials to improve health (MERIT): protocol for research to develop MRC guidance
title_full_unstemmed Bias due to MEasurement Reactions In Trials to improve health (MERIT): protocol for research to develop MRC guidance
title_sort bias due to measurement reactions in trials to improve health (merit): protocol for research to develop mrc guidance
publisher BMC
series Trials
issn 1745-6215
publishDate 2018-11-01
description Abstract Background There is now clear systematic review evidence that measurement can affect the people being measured; much of this evidence focusses on how asking people to complete a questionnaire can result in changes in behaviour. Changes in measured behaviour and other outcomes due to this reactivity may introduce bias in otherwise well-conducted randomised controlled trials (RCTs), yielding incorrect estimates of intervention effects. Despite this, measurement reactivity is not currently adequately considered in risk of bias frameworks. The present research aims to produce a set of guidance statements on how best to avoid or minimise bias due to measurement reactivity in studies of interventions to improve health, with a particular focus on bias in RCTs. Methods The MERIT study consists of a series of systematic and rapid reviews, a Delphi study and an expert workshop to develop guidance on how to minimise bias in trials due to measurement reactivity. An existing systematic review on question-behaviour effects on health-related behaviours will be updated and three new rapid reviews will be conducted to identify (1) existing guidance on measurement reactivity; (2) systematic reviews of studies that have quantified the effects of measurement on outcomes relating to behaviour and affective outcomes in health and non-health contexts and (3) trials that have investigated the effects of objective measurements of behaviour on concurrent or subsequent behaviour itself. A Delphi procedure will be used to combine the views of experts with a view to reaching agreement on the scope of the guidance statements. Finally, a workshop will be held in autumn 2018, with the aim of producing a set of guidance statements that will form the central part of new MRC guidance on how best to avoid bias due to measurement reactivity in studies of interventions to improve health. Discussion Our ambition is to produce MRC guidance on measurement reactions in trials which will be used by future trial researchers, leading to the development of trials that are less likely to be at risk of bias.
topic Measurement
Reactivity
Measurement reactions
Guidance
Trials
Bias
url http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s13063-018-3017-5
work_keys_str_mv AT lisammiles biasduetomeasurementreactionsintrialstoimprovehealthmeritprotocolforresearchtodevelopmrcguidance
AT dianaelbourne biasduetomeasurementreactionsintrialstoimprovehealthmeritprotocolforresearchtodevelopmrcguidance
AT andrewfarmer biasduetomeasurementreactionsintrialstoimprovehealthmeritprotocolforresearchtodevelopmrcguidance
AT martingulliford biasduetomeasurementreactionsintrialstoimprovehealthmeritprotocolforresearchtodevelopmrcguidance
AT louiselocock biasduetomeasurementreactionsintrialstoimprovehealthmeritprotocolforresearchtodevelopmrcguidance
AT jimmccambridge biasduetomeasurementreactionsintrialstoimprovehealthmeritprotocolforresearchtodevelopmrcguidance
AT stephensutton biasduetomeasurementreactionsintrialstoimprovehealthmeritprotocolforresearchtodevelopmrcguidance
AT davidpfrench biasduetomeasurementreactionsintrialstoimprovehealthmeritprotocolforresearchtodevelopmrcguidance
_version_ 1725267148553584640