Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) inform healthcare decisions. It is now apparent that some published RCTs contain false data and some appear to have been entirely fabricated. Systematic reviews are performed to identify and synthesise all RCTs that have been conducted on a given topic. While it is usual to assess methodological features of the RCTs in the process of undertaking a systematic review, it is not usual to consider whether the RCTs contain false data. Studies containing false data therefore go unnoticed and contribute to systematic review conclusions. The INveStigating ProblEmatic Clinical Trials in Systematic Reviews (INSPECT-SR) project will develop a tool to assess the trustworthiness of RCTs in systematic reviews of healthcare-related interventions.

The INSPECT-SR tool will be developed using expert consensus in combination with empirical evidence, over five stages: (1) a survey of experts to assemble a comprehensive list of checks for detecting problematic RCTs, (2) an evaluation of the feasibility and impact of applying the checks to systematic reviews, (3) a Delphi survey to determine which of the checks are supported by expert consensus, culminating in, (4) a consensus meeting to select checks to be included in a draft tool and to determine its format and (5) prospective testing of the draft tool in the production of new health systematic reviews, to allow refinement based on user feedback. We anticipate that the INSPECT-SR tool will help researchers to identify problematic studies and will help patients by protecting them from the influence of false data on their healthcare.

The University of Manchester ethics decision tool was used, and this returned the result that ethical approval was not required for this project (30 September 2022), which incorporates secondary research and surveys of professionals about subjects relating to their expertise. Informed consent will be obtained from all survey participants. All results will be published as open-access articles. The final tool will be made freely available.

This review explored the literature on the use of social media in recruiting young people, aged 13–18 years, to mental health research. It aimed to identify barriers and facilitators to recruitment and strategies to improve participation in future research.

Scoping review.

Articles published between January 2011 and February 2023 were searched for on PubMed, Scopus, Medline (via EBSCOhost) and Cochrane Library databases.

Studies that outlined social media as a recruitment method and recruited participants aged 13–18 years.

Data was extracted by two reviewers independently and cross-checked by a third reviewer. Data on study design, aims, participants, recruitment methods and findings related specifically to social media as a recruitment tool were collected.

24 journal articles met the inclusion criteria. Studies were predominantly surveys (n=13) conducted in the USA (n=16) recruiting via Facebook (n=16) and/or Instagram (n=14). Only nine of the included articles provided a summary of success and reviewed the efficacy of social media recruitment for young people in mental health research. Type of advertisement, the language used, time of day and the use of keywords were all found to be factors that may influence the success of recruitment through social media; however, as these are based on findings from a small number of studies, such potential influences require further investigation.

Social media recruitment can be a successful method for recruiting young people to mental health research. Further research is needed into recruiting socioeconomically marginalised groups using this method, as well as the effectiveness of new social media platforms.

Open Science Framework Registry (https://osf.io/mak75/).