From: The SPIRIT Checklist—lessons from the experience of SPIRIT protocol editors
• Not reading guidance for SPIRIT items | |
• If non-English speaker, not getting article copy-edited | |
• If using the SPIRIT Checklist, putting in a page number but there is no information on this item at that page number or anywhere else in the protocol, not just slippage | |
• Putting in “not applicable” in SPIRIT Checklist or template without an explanation for why N/A | |
• Not clearly stating the sponsor of the trial | |
• Not declaring the role of the funding body in the design of the study and collection, analysis, and interpretation of the data and in writing the manuscript | |
• Not explaining the framework used for the trial (e.g. superiority, equivalence, noninferiority, exploratory) | |
• Not offering to share anonymised trial data without prompting | |
• Not stating that the protocol in the public clinical trial registry will be updated if amended | |
• Not giving a date when it is anticipated the trial recruitment will finish | |
• If using Trials structured template, changing the order of the SPIRIT items | |
• If using Trials structured template, missing out SPIRIT items | |
• If using Trials structured template, missing out headings | |
• If using Trials structured template, duplicate information, so under more than one item and not edited—suggesting authors copy and pasting protocol that has already been written into the template | |
• If using Trials structured template, refers to information under another item instead of inserting it in the correct item |