Check the major trial before funding the topic
Real sources · Illustrative request · Sample version
Customer question
Hypothetical commission: a clinician proposes a review of resistance training after colon cancer.
Does a resistance-only question add value beyond structured-exercise evidence?
CHALLENGE studied structured exercise, not a resistance-only intervention. Check intervention components and existing reviews before proceeding.
Published trial: 5-year disease-free survival
NEJM 2025; n=889. Difference 6.4 percentage points (95% CI 0.6–12.2). This evaluates the programme, not resistance training alone.
Analysis excerpt
| Check | Finding / sample content | Use |
|---|---|---|
| Intervention | The major trial is not resistance-only | Check components and comparator |
| Overlap | Recent reviews and registrations require a full check | Record search dates and coverage |
| Go / narrow / pause | Independent component evidence remains unverified | Deliver staged scope and budget |
Delivery manifest
| File | Format | Contents |
|---|---|---|
| Feasibility memorandum | PICO, overlap, synthesis risks and proceed/narrow/pause rationale | |
| Records and registration check | XLSX | Pilot sources, study identities, access and pending checks |
| Next-stage statement of work | Workload assumptions, review responsibilities and staged quote |
This is an illustrative formal delivery manifest. This pack supplies an HTML report, CSV tables and a source register. Agree formal formats, quantities and scope in the quote.
Acceptance criteria
- The PICO, pilot-search scope, and dates of review and registration checks are clear
- Reasons to proceed, narrow, or pause are supported by sources or explicitly identified information gaps
- Budget assumptions, full-text permissions, and human review responsibilities are traceable; the score and expected direction of findings are not acceptance criteria
Sources
- CHALLENGE trial · NEJM 2025
https://www.nejm.org/doi/10.1056/NEJMoa2502760