Abstract:Objective: Household Air Pollution Intervention Network (HAPIN) investigators tested a complex, non-pharmacological intervention in four low- and middle-income countries as a strategy to mitigate household air pollution and improve health outcomes across the lifespan. Intervention households received a liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) stove, continuous fuel delivery and regular behavioral reinforcements for 18 months, whereas controls were asked to continue with usual cooking practices. While HAPIN was designed as an explanatory trial to test the efficacy of the intervention on four primary outcomes, it introduced several pragmatic aspects in its design and conduct that resemble real-life conditions. We surveyed HAPIN investigators and asked them to rank what aspects of the design and conduct they considered were more pragmatic than explanatory. Methods: We used the revised Pragmatic Explanatory Continuum Indicator Summary (PRECIS-2) to survey investigators on the degree of pragmatism in nine domains of trial design and conduct using a five-point Likert rank scale from very explanatory (1) to very pragmatic (5). We invited 103 investigators. Participants were given educational material on PRECIS-2, including presentations, papers and examples that described the use and implementation of PRECIS-2. Results: Thirty-five investigators (mean age 42 years, 51% female) participated in the survey. Overall, only 17% ranked all domains as very explanatory, with an average (±SD) rank of 3.2 ± 1.4 across domains. Fewer than 20% of investigators ranked eligibility, recruitment or setting as very explanatory. In contrast, ≥50% of investigators ranked the trial organization, delivery and adherence of the intervention and follow-up as very/rather explanatory whereas ≤17% ranked them as rather/very pragmatic. Finally, <25% of investigators ranked the relevance of outcomes to participants and analysis as very/rather explanatory whereas ≥50% ranked then as rather/very pragmatic. In-country partners were more likely to rank domains as pragmatic when compared to investigators working in central coordination (average rank 3.2 vs. 2.8, respectively; Wilcoxon rank-sum p < 0.001). Conclusion: HAPIN investigators did not consider their efficacy trial to be rather/very explanatory and reported that some aspects of the design and conduct were executed under real-world conditions; however, they also did not consider the trial to be overly pragmatic. Our analysis underscores the importance of using standardized tools such as PRECIS-2 to guide early discussions among investigators in the design of environmental health trials attempting to measure efficacy.

Pragmatic trials and implementation science: grounds for divorce?

Similarities and Differences Between Pragmatic Trials and Hybrid Effectiveness-Implementation Trials

Radical Thinking: Scientific Rigor and Pragmatism

Thoughtful selection and use of scientific terms in clinical research: the case of ‘pragmatic’ trials

A review of pragmatic trials found a high degree of diversity in design and scope, deficiencies in reporting and trial registry data, and poor indexing

Pragmatic Trials in Long‐Term Care: Implementation and Dissemination Challenges and Opportunities

Facing the Realities of Pragmatic Design Choices in Environmental Health Studies: Experiences from the Household Air Pollution Intervention Network Trial

Are pragmatism and ethical protections in clinical trials a zero-sum game?

Factors Affecting Post-trial Sustainment or De-implementation of Study Interventions: A Narrative Review

Practical trials in medical education: linking theory, practice and decision making

Pragmatic approaches to analyzing qualitative data for implementation science: an introduction

Are randomised controlled trials positivist? Reviewing the social science and philosophy literature to assess positivist tendencies of trials of social interventions in public health and health services

Pragmatic randomized controlled trials: strengthening the concept through a robust international collaborative network: PRIME-9—Pragmatic Research and Innovation through Multinational Experimentation

Pragmatism in Pediatric Neurosurgery: More Than a Pipe Dream? A Systematic Literature Review and Analysis

The struggle of translating science into action: Foundational concepts of implementation science

Understanding implementation of findings from trial method research: a mixed methods study applying implementation frameworks and behaviour change models

Building Capacity for Pragmatic Trials of Digital Technology in Primary Care

Being pragmatic about healthcare complexity: our experiences applying complexity theory and pragmatism to health services research

Pragmatic clinical trials embedded in healthcare systems: generalizable lessons from the NIH Collaboratory

Comments, suggestions, and criticisms of the Pragmatic Explanatory Continuum Indicator Summary-2 design tool: a citation analysis

Research objectives and general considerations for pragmatic clinical trials of pain treatments: IMMPACT statement