Are pharmacological randomised controlled clinical trials relevant to real-life asthma populations? : A protocol for an UNLOCK study from the IPCRG

Funding The IPCRG provided funding for this research project as an UNLOCK Group study for which the funding was obtained through an unrestricted grant by Novartis AG, Basel, Switzerland. Novartis has no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish or preparation of the manuscript. This study will include data from the Optimum Patient Care Research Database and is undertaken in collaboration with Optimum Patient Care and the Respiratory Effectiveness Group.

Methods and processes for development of a CONSORT extension for reporting pilot randomized controlled trials

Peer reviewed

Should weight loss and maintenance programmes be designed differently for men? : A systematic review of long-term randomised controlled trials presenting data for men and women: The ROMEO project

Crown Copyright © 2015. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Acknowledgements This review is one of a series of systematic reviews for the ROMEO project (Review Of MEn and Obesity), funded by the National Institute for Health Research, Health Technology Assessment Programme (NIHR HTA Project 09/127/01; Systematic reviews and integrated report on the quantitative and qualitative evidence base for the management of obesity in men http://www.hta.ac.uk/2545). The views and opinions expressed therein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Department of Health. HERU, HSRU and NMAHP are funded by the Chief Scientist Office of the Scottish Government Health and Social Care Directorates. The authors accept full responsibility for this publication. We would also like to thank the Men's Health Forums of Scotland, Ireland, England and Wales: Tim Street, Paula Carroll, Colin Fowler and David Wilkins. We also thank Kate Jolly for further information about the Lighten Up trial.

Should weight loss and maintenance programmes be designed differently for men? : A systematic review of long-term randomised controlled trials presenting data for men and women: The ROMEO project

Crown Copyright © 2015. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Acknowledgements This review is one of a series of systematic reviews for the ROMEO project (Review Of MEn and Obesity), funded by the National Institute for Health Research, Health Technology Assessment Programme (NIHR HTA Project 09/127/01; Systematic reviews and integrated report on the quantitative and qualitative evidence base for the management of obesity in men http://www.hta.ac.uk/2545). The views and opinions expressed therein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Department of Health. HERU, HSRU and NMAHP are funded by the Chief Scientist Office of the Scottish Government Health and Social Care Directorates. The authors accept full responsibility for this publication. We would also like to thank the Men's Health Forums of Scotland, Ireland, England and Wales: Tim Street, Paula Carroll, Colin Fowler and David Wilkins. We also thank Kate Jolly for further information about the Lighten Up trial.

Task-switch costs subsequent to cue-only trials

Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank Fiona Carr, Carmen Horne, and Brigitta Toth for assistance with data collection. Disclosure statement No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors. Funding information The authors would like to thank the School of Psychology, University of Aberdeen, for contributing funding for participant payments.

Decision aids for people considering taking part in clinical trials

Peer reviewed

A protocol for a systematic review of non-randomised evaluations of strategies to improve participant recruitment to randomised controlled trials

Peer reviewed

Two parallel, pragmatic, UK multicentre, randomised controlled trials comparing surgical options for upper compartment (vault or uterine) pelvic organ prolapse (the VUE Study) : study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

The VUE study is funded by the National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme (project number 11/129/183).

A protocol for a systematic review of non-randomised evaluations of strategies to improve participant recruitment to randomised controlled trials

Peer reviewed

Eligibility of real-life patients with COPD for inclusion in trials of inhaled long-acting bronchodilator therapy

Data access and analyses were funded by Boehringer Ingelheim, who played no role in the conduct or reporting of the study.