Main findings
A usefulness tool was developed with eight criteria combining 13 items
identified through literature searches and consensus. Among 350 RCTs in
PTB, many usefulness features were not met, with one tenth of trials
meeting half of the items evaluated. Exploring the change in usefulness
over time, most usefulness transparency features started to appear after
the year 2000 and became more prominent after 2010. We found no
substantial change in information gain, except for higher impact
journals, which increased their information gain by reporting more
complete power calculations, but in return more surrogate and composite
outcomes as primary outcome were used. There was a remarkable absence of
patient centeredness and value for money, and a very low percentage of
pragmatic trial designs.