Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 26, 2025

The Participant-Reported Implementation Update and Score PRIUS: A Novel Method for Capturing Implementation-Related Data Over Time
Published on: February 19, 2021
Reporting Quality of AI Intervention in Randomized Controlled Trials in Primary Care: Systematic Review and
Jinjia Zhong1, Ting Zhu1, Yafang Huang1
1School of General Practice and Continuing Education, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Background:
The surge in artificial intelligence (AI) interventions in primary care trials lacks a study on reporting quality.
Objective:
This study aimed to systematically evaluate the reporting quality of both published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and protocols for RCTs that investigated AI interventions in primary care.
Methods:
PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Web of Science, and CINAHL databases were searched for RCTs and protocols on AI interventions in primary care until November 2024. Eligible studies were published RCTs or full protocols for RCTs exploring AI interventions in primary care. The reporting quality was assessed using CONSORT-AI (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials-Artificial Intelligence) and SPIRIT-AI (Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials-Artificial Intelligence) checklists, focusing on AI intervention-related items.
Results:
A total of 11,711 records were identified. In total, 19 published RCTs and 21 RCT protocols for 35 trials were included. The overall proportion of adequately reported items was 65% (172/266; 95% CI 59%-70%) and 68% (214/315; 95% CI 62%-73%) for RCTs and protocols, respectively. The percentage of RCTs and protocols that reported a specific item ranged from 11% (2/19) to 100% (19/19) and from 10% (2/21) to 100% (21/21), respectively. The reporting of both RCTs and protocols exhibited similar characteristics and trends. They both lack transparency and completeness, which can be summarized in three aspects: without providing adequate information regarding the input data, without mentioning the methods for identifying and analyzing performance errors, and without stating whether and how the AI intervention and its code can be accessed.
Conclusions:
The reporting quality could be improved in both RCTs and protocols. This study helps promote the transparent and complete reporting of trials with AI interventions in primary care.
More Related Videos
06:28E-Patient Counseling Trial E-PACO: Computer Based Education versus Nurse Counseling for Patients to Prepare for Colonoscopy
Published on: August 1, 2019
07:31A Computerized Functional Skills Assessment and Training Program Targeting Technology Based Everyday Functional Skills
Published on: February 13, 2020
Related Concept Videos
Introduction to Documentation and Reporting
Nursing documentation records essential information and details regarding a patient's care and treatment in written or electronic form. It is a critical aspect of nursing practice that involves documenting assessments, interventions, outcomes, and other relevant details about a patient's health status.
Documentation maps the patient's health journey by creating a comprehensive...
Blinding
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast,...
Clinical Trials
There are four phases in a clinical trial. A phase one...
Regression Toward the Mean
Types of Reports III: Telephone and Verbal Reports
Here's an overview of each type:
Telephone Orders