Current Issues of Pharmacy and Medical Sciences

Tools for a correct design and quality assessment of pragmatic randomizedcon trolled trials: PRECIS, PR-tool and Prag mascope to

Current Issues in Pharmacy and Medical Sciences Vol. 26, No. 3, Pages 292-295


Department of Diagnostics, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Cracow, Poland

DOI: 10.12923/j.2084-980X/26.3/a.11


Identification of scientific data in the systematic reviews required for the rational decisions on health policy is an important tool in determining the validity of the financing of treatment from public funds based on the health technology assessment (HTA). The primary source of scientific medical evidence are randomized controlled trials (RCTs), but their features markedly reduce the possibility of the transfer of the results to the routine practice. In this situation an important role begin to play pragmatic randomized controlled trials (pRCTs), providing highly reliable information about drug effectiveness in contrast to observational studies or registries. Here, we described three suitable universal tools, which can be used during the designing or evaluation of reliability of pRCTs: PRECIS, PR-tool and Pragmascope tool.

Files to download


health technology assessment (HTA), PRECIS, PR-tool, Pragmascope tool, quality assessment


  1. Alford L.: On differences between explanatory and pragmatic clinical trials. N. Z. J. Physiother. 35, 12, 2007.
  2. Kaczyński L., Solnica B.: Pragmatic randomized controlled trials as a source of data in the assessment of effectiveness of medical technology. Prz Lek. 69, 703, 2012.
  3. Koppenaal T. et al.: Pragmatic vs. explanatory: an adaptation of the PRECIS tool helps to judge the applicability of systematic reviews for daily practice. J Clin Epidemiol. 64, 1095, 2011.
  4. Loudon K. et al.: Making clinical trials more relevant: improving and validating the PRECIS tool for matching trial design decisions to trial purpose. Trials. 14, 115, 2013.
  5. Macpherson H.: Pragmatic clinical trials. Complement Ther. Med. 12, 136, 2004.
  6. Möller H-J.: Effectiveness studies: advantages and disadvantages. Dialogues Clin Neurosci. 13, 199, 2011.
  7. Riddle D.L. et al.: The Pragmatic-Explanatory Continuum Indicator Summary (PRECIS) instrument was useful for refining a randomized trial design: experiences from an investigative team. J Clin Epidemiol. 63, 1271, 2010.
  8. Thorpe K.E. et al.: A pragmatic-explanatory continuum indicator summary (PRECIS): a tool to help trial designers. CMAJ. 180, E47, 2009.
  9. Thorpe K.E. et al.: A pragmatic-explanatory continuum indicator summary (PRECIS): a tool to help trial designers. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 62, 464, 2009.
  10. Tosh G., Soares-Weiser K., Adams C.E.: Pragmatic vs explanatory trials: the pragmascope tool to help measure differences in protocols of mental health randomized controlled trials. Dialogues Clin Neurosci. 13, 209, 2011.
  11. Treweek S., Zwarenstein M.: Making trials matter: pragmatic and explanatory trials and the problem of applicability. Trials 10, 37, 2009.
prev next



April 2020

Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun
    01 02 03 04 05
06 07 08 09 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30