Reducing bias in trials from reactions to measurement: the MERIT study including developmental work and expert workshop

French, David P; Miles, Lisa M; Elbourne, Diana; Farmer, Andrew; Gulliford, Martin; Locock, Louise; Sutton, Stephen; McCambridge, Jim; ,

doi:10.3310/hta25550

Graphic version of this page | Change how these pages look

Journals Library

NHS NIHR - National Institute for Health Research

Journals

Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn
Email

An error occurred retrieving publication content to display, please try again.

Home >> Journals >> Health Technology Assessment >> Page Not Found

Page not found (404)

Sorry - the page you requested could not be found.

Please choose a page from the navigation or try a website search above to find the information you need.

Home >> Journals >> Health Technology Assessment >> Volume {{metadata.Volume}} >> Issue {{metadata.Issue}}
Extended Research Article
i

Toolkit

View Award

This document provides evidence on how measurement procedures in trials of interventions to improve health produce risk of bias, and provides recommendations on how best to minimise such bias.

David P French
[Image - ORCID logo], Lisa M Miles
[Image - ORCID logo], Diana Elbourne
[Image - ORCID logo], Andrew Farmer
[Image - ORCID logo], Martin Gulliford
[Image - ORCID logo], Louise Locock
[Image - ORCID logo], Stephen Sutton
[Image - ORCID logo], Jim McCambridge
[Image - ORCID logo] & .

Detailed Author information
Detailed Author information

David P French ^1,^*, Lisa M Miles ¹, Diana Elbourne ², Andrew Farmer ³, Martin Gulliford ⁴, Louise Locock ⁵, Stephen Sutton ⁶, Jim McCambridge ⁷, ^†

¹ Manchester Centre for Health Psychology, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
² Department of Medical Statistics, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK
³ Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
⁴ School of Population Health and Environmental Sciences, King’s College London, London, UK
⁵ Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK
⁶ Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
⁷ Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK
^* Corresponding author Email: david.french@manchester.ac.uk

Funding: {{metadata.Funding}}

{{metadata.Journal}} Volume: {{metadata.Volume}}, Issue: {{metadata.Issue}}, Published in {{metadata.PublicationDate | date:'MMMM yyyy'}}

https://doi.org/{{metadata.DOI}}

Citation:{{author}}{{ (($index < metadata.AuthorsArray.length-1) && ($index <=6)) ? ', ' : '' }}{{(metadata.AuthorsArray.length <= 6) ? '.' : '' }} {{(metadata.AuthorsArray.length > 6) ? 'et al. ' : ''}}. {{metadata.JournalShortName}} {{metadata.PublicationDate | date:'yyyy'}};{{metadata.Volume}}({{metadata.Issue}})

[Image - Crossmark status check]

Report Content

Full Report
Abstract
Plain English Summary
Plain Language Summary
Scientific Summary

The full text of this issue is available as a PDF document from the Toolkit section on this page.

Responses to this report

No responses have been published.

If you would like to submit a response to this publication, please do so using the form below:

Comments submitted to the NIHR Journals Library are electronic letters to the editor. They enable our readers to debate issues raised in research reports published in the Journals Library. We aim to post within 14 working days all responses that contribute substantially to the topic investigated, as determined by the Editors. Non-relevant comments will be deleted.

Your name and affiliations will be published with your comment.

Once published, you will not have the right to remove or edit your response. The Editors may add, remove, or edit comments at their absolute discretion.

Enter response message*
Name (title, first name, last name)*
Occupation / Job title*
Affiliation / Employer*
Email*
Other authors
For example, if you are responding as a team or group. Please ensure you include full names and separate these using commas
Statement of competing interestsWe believe that readers should be aware of any competing interests (conflicts of interest).The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) define competing interests as including: financial relationships with industry (for example through employment, consultancies, stock, ownership, honoraria, and expert testimony), either directly or through immediate family; personal relationships; academic competition; and intellectual passion.
If yes, please provide details below
Enter response title*
Enter CAPTCHA What is six multiplied by three?*

By submitting your response, you are stating that you agree to the terms & conditions

An error has occurred in processing the XML document