Efficacy Versus Effectiveness in Trial Design and Reporting: Encouraging Debate Using Low Back Pain Trial Exemplars

In this viewpoint, we explore the efficacy-to-effectiveness design spectrum of randomised controlled trials that test complex interventions. We make three main arguments: 1) reporting of trial design is not always explicit in terms of the efficacy-to-effectiveness spectrum; 2) there is inconsistency between trial positioning on this spectrum and authors’ interpretations of the readiness of interventions to be implemented in real-world clinical practice; and 3) between-group effect sizes are likely to be larger in efficacy trials than effectiveness trials. We draw on five recent exemplar trials of complex interventions for low back pain published in leading medical journals and the Rating of Included Trials on the Efficacy-Effectiveness Spectrum tool to explore our assumptions. Our exploratory observations suggest inconsistency in reporting of efficacy-to-effectiveness design, and we found trends of efficacy trials having larger effects. From our observations, we make recommendations for trial end users including researchers, guideline committees and healthcare practitioners.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
JOSPT Methods
Published
2026-03-02
DOI
https://doi.org/10.2519/josptmethods.2026.0016
Primary Topic
Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Efficacy Versus Effectiveness in Trial Design and Reporting: Encouraging Debate Using Low Back Pain Trial Exemplars

Jonathan G. Quicke, Jon J. Ford, Andrew J. Hahne, Nadine E. Foster et al.
JOSPT Methods
Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
article

Efficacy Versus Effectiveness in Trial Design and Reporting: Encouraging Debate Using Low Back Pain Trial Exemplars

Jonathan G. Quicke, Jon J. Ford, Andrew J. Hahne, Nadine E. Foster, Paul W. Hodges, David Hohenschurz-Schmidt
article en

Abstract

In this viewpoint, we explore the efficacy-to-effectiveness design spectrum of randomised controlled trials that test complex interventions. We make three main arguments: 1) reporting of trial design is not always explicit in terms of the efficacy-to-effectiveness spectrum; 2) there is inconsistency between trial positioning on this spectrum and authors’ interpretations of the readiness of interventions to be implemented in real-world clinical practice; and 3) between-group effect sizes are likely to be larger in efficacy trials than effectiveness trials. We draw on five recent exemplar trials of complex interventions for low back pain published in leading medical journals and the Rating of Included Trials on the Efficacy-Effectiveness Spectrum tool to explore our assumptions. Our exploratory observations suggest inconsistency in reporting of efficacy-to-effectiveness design, and we found trends of efficacy trials having larger effects. From our observations, we make recommendations for trial end users including researchers, guideline committees and healthcare practitioners.

JOSPT Methods
Queensland Health (AU), Queensland University of Technology (AU), The University of Queensland (AU), La Trobe University (AU), Metro South Health (AU), Imperial College London (GB)
Openalex Percentile: Top 41%
Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Efficacy Versus Effectiveness in Trial Design and Reporting: Encouraging Debate Using Low Back Pain Trial Exemplars — Jonathan G. Quicke, Jon J. Ford, et al. · JOSPT Methods (2026) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS