Standards for reporting research methods, interventions, and outcomes in Surgical Prehabilitation Studies (SOS-Prehab)

Chelsia Gillis; Daniel  McIsaac; Daniel Santa Mina; Stéphanie  Chevalier; Gabriele  Baldini; Francesco Carli; Celena  Scheede-Bergdahl; Linda  Edgar; Vanessa  Smrk; Leah Avery; Amal  Bessissow; Miquel  Coca Martinez; Robert  Copeland; Susanne  Oksbjerg Dalton; Gerard  Danjoux; Linda  Denehy; Dominique  Engel; Chloe  Grimmett; Michael  Grocott; Heather  Gill; Sandy  Jack; Bente  Thoft Jensen; Denny  Levett; Graciela  Martinez-Palli; Zoe  Merchant; John  Moore; Nicolò  Pecorelli; Ian  Randall; Bernhard  Riedel; Geoff  Schierbeck; Gerrit  Slooter; Malcolm  West; Julio  Fiore Jr

doi:10.1093/bjs/znaf302

Standards for reporting research methods, interventions, and outcomes in Surgical Prehabilitation Studies (SOS-Prehab)

Chelsia Gillis
, Daniel McIsaac
, Daniel Santa Mina
, Stéphanie Chevalier
, Gabriele Baldini
, Francesco Carli
, Celena Scheede-Bergdahl
, Linda Edgar
, Vanessa Smrk
, Leah Avery
, Amal Bessissow
, Miquel Coca Martinez
, Robert Copeland
, Susanne Oksbjerg Dalton
, Gerard Danjoux
, Linda Denehy
, Dominique Engel
, Chloe Grimmett
, Michael Grocott
, Heather Gill

Sandy Jack, Bente Thoft Jensen, Denny Levett, Graciela Martinez-Palli, Zoe Merchant, John Moore, Nicolò Pecorelli, Ian Randall, Bernhard Riedel, Geoff Schierbeck, Gerrit Slooter, Malcolm West, Julio Fiore Jr

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

4 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Background
Prehabilitation, a process of building physiological reserve before surgery to improve postoperative outcomes, is a complex, multimodal intervention that requires rigorous evaluation in clinical trials. Incomplete reporting by such trials obscures essential intervention components and delivery contexts, hindering comparability and interpretability. This, in turn, limits clinical implementation and the replication or refinement of interventions by researchers. The aim of this study was to develop a reporting checklist for RCTs of prehabilitation.

Methods
A modified two-round Delphi process using the EQUATOR framework with 53 international experts across exercise, nutrition, psychological, and perioperative care disciplines was conducted. An initial checklist of candidate items was adapted from existing reporting standards, contextualized for prehabilitation, and iteratively refined through expert voting. Items rated eight to nine on a nine-point scale by ≥70% of participants in round two were classified as ‘essential’ and those rated seven were considered ‘important’.

Results
The final checklist comprised 40 items. Sixteen items were classified as ‘essential’ and 24 items were classified as ‘important’ for guiding comprehensive reporting of prehabilitation interventions. These items span key domains including intervention components, delivery methods, adherence, participant characteristics, and outcome measures. High agreement among experts underscores the checklist’s relevance and usability.

Conclusion
Adoption of Standards for reporting research methods, interventions, and Outcomes in Surgical Prehabilitation studies (SOS-Prehab), alongside methodological and outcome-reporting items of CONSORT could improve transparency, completeness, and interpretability of prehabilitation trials. This could enable better reproducibility, robust evidence synthesis, and accelerate translation into clinical practice and policy.

Original language	English
Article number	znaf302
Number of pages	12
Journal	British Journal of Surgery
Volume	113
Issue number	3
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1093/bjs/znaf302
Publication status	Published - 14 Mar 2026

Access to Document

10.1093/bjs/znaf302Licence: CC BY-NC

Full TextFinal published version, 449 KBLicence: CC BY-NC

Cite this

Gillis, C., McIsaac , D., Santa Mina, D., Chevalier, S., Baldini, G., Carli, F., Scheede-Bergdahl, C., Edgar, L., Smrk, V., Avery, L., Bessissow, A., Coca Martinez, M., Copeland, R., Oksbjerg Dalton, S., Danjoux, G., Denehy, L., Engel, D., Grimmett, C., Grocott, M., ... Fiore Jr, J. (2026). Standards for reporting research methods, interventions, and outcomes in Surgical Prehabilitation Studies (SOS-Prehab). British Journal of Surgery, 113(3), Article znaf302. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjs/znaf302

@article{e2b911b4c5c74dcfa41ec12d8a3a90d0,

title = "Standards for reporting research methods, interventions, and outcomes in Surgical Prehabilitation Studies (SOS-Prehab)",

abstract = "Background Prehabilitation, a process of building physiological reserve before surgery to improve postoperative outcomes, is a complex, multimodal intervention that requires rigorous evaluation in clinical trials. Incomplete reporting by such trials obscures essential intervention components and delivery contexts, hindering comparability and interpretability. This, in turn, limits clinical implementation and the replication or refinement of interventions by researchers. The aim of this study was to develop a reporting checklist for RCTs of prehabilitation. Methods A modified two-round Delphi process using the EQUATOR framework with 53 international experts across exercise, nutrition, psychological, and perioperative care disciplines was conducted. An initial checklist of candidate items was adapted from existing reporting standards, contextualized for prehabilitation, and iteratively refined through expert voting. Items rated eight to nine on a nine-point scale by ≥70\% of participants in round two were classified as {\textquoteleft}essential{\textquoteright} and those rated seven were considered {\textquoteleft}important{\textquoteright}. Results The final checklist comprised 40 items. Sixteen items were classified as {\textquoteleft}essential{\textquoteright} and 24 items were classified as {\textquoteleft}important{\textquoteright} for guiding comprehensive reporting of prehabilitation interventions. These items span key domains including intervention components, delivery methods, adherence, participant characteristics, and outcome measures. High agreement among experts underscores the checklist{\textquoteright}s relevance and usability. Conclusion Adoption of Standards for reporting research methods, interventions, and Outcomes in Surgical Prehabilitation studies (SOS-Prehab), alongside methodological and outcome-reporting items of CONSORT could improve transparency, completeness, and interpretability of prehabilitation trials. This could enable better reproducibility, robust evidence synthesis, and accelerate translation into clinical practice and policy.",

author = "Chelsia Gillis and Daniel McIsaac and \{Santa Mina\}, Daniel and St{\'e}phanie Chevalier and Gabriele Baldini and Francesco Carli and Celena Scheede-Bergdahl and Linda Edgar and Vanessa Smrk and Leah Avery and Amal Bessissow and \{Coca Martinez\}, Miquel and Robert Copeland and \{Oksbjerg Dalton\}, Susanne and Gerard Danjoux and Linda Denehy and Dominique Engel and Chloe Grimmett and Michael Grocott and Heather Gill and Sandy Jack and \{Thoft Jensen\}, Bente and Denny Levett and Graciela Martinez-Palli and Zoe Merchant and John Moore and Nicol{\`o} Pecorelli and Ian Randall and Bernhard Riedel and Geoff Schierbeck and Gerrit Slooter and Malcolm West and \{Fiore Jr\}, Julio",

year = "2026",

month = mar,

day = "14",

doi = "10.1093/bjs/znaf302",

language = "English",

volume = "113",

journal = "British Journal of Surgery",

issn = "0007-1323",

publisher = "Oxford University Press",

number = "3",

}

Gillis, C, McIsaac , D, Santa Mina, D, Chevalier, S, Baldini, G, Carli, F, Scheede-Bergdahl, C, Edgar, L, Smrk, V, Avery, L, Bessissow, A, Coca Martinez, M, Copeland, R, Oksbjerg Dalton, S, Danjoux, G, Denehy, L, Engel, D, Grimmett, C, Grocott, M, Gill, H, Jack, S, Thoft Jensen, B, Levett, D, Martinez-Palli, G, Merchant, Z, Moore, J, Pecorelli, N, Randall, I, Riedel, B, Schierbeck, G, Slooter, G, West, M & Fiore Jr, J 2026, 'Standards for reporting research methods, interventions, and outcomes in Surgical Prehabilitation Studies (SOS-Prehab)', British Journal of Surgery, vol. 113, no. 3, znaf302. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjs/znaf302

TY - JOUR

T1 - Standards for reporting research methods, interventions, and outcomes in Surgical Prehabilitation Studies (SOS-Prehab)

AU - Gillis, Chelsia

AU - McIsaac , Daniel

AU - Santa Mina, Daniel

AU - Chevalier, Stéphanie

AU - Baldini, Gabriele

AU - Carli, Francesco

AU - Scheede-Bergdahl, Celena

AU - Edgar, Linda

AU - Smrk, Vanessa

AU - Avery, Leah

AU - Bessissow, Amal

AU - Coca Martinez, Miquel

AU - Copeland, Robert

AU - Oksbjerg Dalton, Susanne

AU - Danjoux, Gerard

AU - Denehy, Linda

AU - Engel, Dominique

AU - Grimmett, Chloe

AU - Grocott, Michael

AU - Gill, Heather

AU - Jack, Sandy

AU - Thoft Jensen, Bente

AU - Levett, Denny

AU - Martinez-Palli, Graciela

AU - Merchant, Zoe

AU - Moore, John

AU - Pecorelli, Nicolò

AU - Randall, Ian

AU - Riedel, Bernhard

AU - Schierbeck, Geoff

AU - Slooter, Gerrit

AU - West, Malcolm

AU - Fiore Jr, Julio

PY - 2026/3/14

Y1 - 2026/3/14

N2 - Background Prehabilitation, a process of building physiological reserve before surgery to improve postoperative outcomes, is a complex, multimodal intervention that requires rigorous evaluation in clinical trials. Incomplete reporting by such trials obscures essential intervention components and delivery contexts, hindering comparability and interpretability. This, in turn, limits clinical implementation and the replication or refinement of interventions by researchers. The aim of this study was to develop a reporting checklist for RCTs of prehabilitation. Methods A modified two-round Delphi process using the EQUATOR framework with 53 international experts across exercise, nutrition, psychological, and perioperative care disciplines was conducted. An initial checklist of candidate items was adapted from existing reporting standards, contextualized for prehabilitation, and iteratively refined through expert voting. Items rated eight to nine on a nine-point scale by ≥70% of participants in round two were classified as ‘essential’ and those rated seven were considered ‘important’. Results The final checklist comprised 40 items. Sixteen items were classified as ‘essential’ and 24 items were classified as ‘important’ for guiding comprehensive reporting of prehabilitation interventions. These items span key domains including intervention components, delivery methods, adherence, participant characteristics, and outcome measures. High agreement among experts underscores the checklist’s relevance and usability. Conclusion Adoption of Standards for reporting research methods, interventions, and Outcomes in Surgical Prehabilitation studies (SOS-Prehab), alongside methodological and outcome-reporting items of CONSORT could improve transparency, completeness, and interpretability of prehabilitation trials. This could enable better reproducibility, robust evidence synthesis, and accelerate translation into clinical practice and policy.

AB - Background Prehabilitation, a process of building physiological reserve before surgery to improve postoperative outcomes, is a complex, multimodal intervention that requires rigorous evaluation in clinical trials. Incomplete reporting by such trials obscures essential intervention components and delivery contexts, hindering comparability and interpretability. This, in turn, limits clinical implementation and the replication or refinement of interventions by researchers. The aim of this study was to develop a reporting checklist for RCTs of prehabilitation. Methods A modified two-round Delphi process using the EQUATOR framework with 53 international experts across exercise, nutrition, psychological, and perioperative care disciplines was conducted. An initial checklist of candidate items was adapted from existing reporting standards, contextualized for prehabilitation, and iteratively refined through expert voting. Items rated eight to nine on a nine-point scale by ≥70% of participants in round two were classified as ‘essential’ and those rated seven were considered ‘important’. Results The final checklist comprised 40 items. Sixteen items were classified as ‘essential’ and 24 items were classified as ‘important’ for guiding comprehensive reporting of prehabilitation interventions. These items span key domains including intervention components, delivery methods, adherence, participant characteristics, and outcome measures. High agreement among experts underscores the checklist’s relevance and usability. Conclusion Adoption of Standards for reporting research methods, interventions, and Outcomes in Surgical Prehabilitation studies (SOS-Prehab), alongside methodological and outcome-reporting items of CONSORT could improve transparency, completeness, and interpretability of prehabilitation trials. This could enable better reproducibility, robust evidence synthesis, and accelerate translation into clinical practice and policy.

U2 - 10.1093/bjs/znaf302

DO - 10.1093/bjs/znaf302

M3 - Article

SN - 0007-1323

VL - 113

JO - British Journal of Surgery

JF - British Journal of Surgery

IS - 3

M1 - znaf302

ER -

Standards for reporting research methods, interventions, and outcomes in Surgical Prehabilitation Studies (SOS-Prehab)

Abstract

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this