Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 30, 2026

The Participant-Reported Implementation Update and Score (PRIUS): A Novel Method for Capturing Implementation-Related Data Over Time
Published on: February 19, 2021
Reporting of factorial trials of complex interventions in community settings: a systematic review
Alan A Montgomery1, Margaret P Astin, Tim J Peters
1Bristol Randomised Trials Collaboration, School of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, UK. alan.a.montgomery@bristol.ac.uk
Background:
Standards for the reporting of factorial randomised trials remain to be established. We aimed to review the quality of reporting of methodological aspects of published factorial trials of complex interventions in community settings.
Methods:
We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsychInfo and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register to identify factorial randomised trials of complex interventions in community settings from January 2000 to August 2009. We also conducted a citation search of two review papers published in 2003. Data were extracted by two reviewers on 22 items relating to study design, analysis and presentation.
Results:
We identified 5941 unique titles, from which 116 full papers were obtained and 76 were included in the review. The included trials reflected a broad range of target conditions and types of intervention. The median sample size was 400 (interquartile range 191-1001). Most (88%) trials employed a 2 × 2 factorial design. Few trials (21%) explicitly stated the rationale for using a factorial design. Reporting of aspects of design, analysis or presentation specific to factorial trials was variable, but there was no evidence that reporting of these aspects was different for trials published before or after 2003. However, for CONSORT items that apply generally to the reporting of all trials, there was some evidence that later studies were more likely to report employing an intention-to-treat (ITT) approach (78% vs 52%), present appropriate between-group estimates of effect (88% vs 63%), and present standard errors or 95% confidence intervals for such estimates (78% vs 56%). Interactions between interventions and some measure of the precision associated with such effects were reported in only 14 (18%) trials.
Conclusions:
Reports of factorial trials of complex interventions in community settings vary in the amount of information they provide regarding important methodological aspects of design and analysis. This variability supports the extension of CONSORT guidelines to include the specific reporting of factorial trials.
Related Concept Videos
Community Based Intervention
Foundations of Community Mental Health Programs
Central to the success of community-based interventions is the...
Study Designs in Epidemiology
Observational studies are those where the researcher does not intervene but rather observes natural variations. They include cross-sectional, cohort, and case-control studies.
Factorial Design
Clinical Trials: Overview
Strategies for Assessing and Addressing Confounding
Confounding can be addressed at both the design phase of a study and through analytical methods after data...
Clinical Trials
There are four phases in a clinical trial. A phase one...