TARGET Reporting Statement
Reporting guidance for observational analyses explicitly emulating a target trial, distinct from the target-trial design framework, a protocol template, or a guarantee of causal validity.
On this page
What this is
Reporting guidance for observational analyses explicitly emulating a target trial, distinct from the target-trial design framework, a protocol template, or a guarantee of causal validity. The 21-item TARGET statement concerns transparent reporting of an observational emulation: the question, target trial, mapping to data, identifying assumptions, analysis, estimates, sensitivity, and other research information. The official instrument supplies exact items; the domains below are an original practical crosswalk, not a reproduction or substitute checklist.
When to use
Use when reporting an observational study that explicitly aims to emulate a target trial. Apply the relevant routine-data reporting guidance alongside it when using claims, EHR, registry, or linked data. Existing protocol and SAP templates can carry the information before analysis, but completing a template does not establish that every TARGET reporting item has been met.
What it requires and practical domains
The analyst or appraiser should keep the question, population, outcome or model result, source documents, version, and judgments connected. Use the domains below to organize that evidence. They are a condensed implementation crosswalk; consult the linked official source for exact instrument text, permissions, and decision rules. Retain disagreements and missing information rather than converting them into favorable answers.
When NOT to use and limitations
Do not use TARGET to relabel an actual randomized trial as observational, infer that explicit time zero removes confounding, or claim that transparent reporting identifies a causal effect when positivity, measurement, or exchangeability fail. A completed form documents an assessment; it does not create missing study evidence, guarantee future performance, or authorize a clinical, regulatory, or reimbursement conclusion. Applicability remains a separate question from internal validity and reporting completeness.
How it maps to this catalog
Follow the related concepts to implement definitions, analysis, diagnostics, and interpretation. For this entry the companion routes are target-trial-emulation, estimand-analysis-traceability-rwe, study-protocol-or-sap-elements, record, harper. Preserve the distinction between the guidance/tool and the methods that implement it; source-backed concepts explain those methods, while this resource organizes reporting or appraisal evidence.
Evidence record
For each applicable domain record the exact evidence location, relevant study/model version, judgment and rationale, uncertainty, unresolved issue, responsible reviewer, and review date. Do not invent approvals, validation results, or completed analyses to fill a field. Store the actual operational specification separately from the assessment, so a favorable label cannot silently replace the underlying evidence.
Checklist
- Identify the observational emulation and state the causal question and rationale.
- Specify the target protocol and its mapping to observed eligibility, strategies, timing, outcomes, and contrasts.
- Describe identification assumptions, data construction, estimation, and departures from the target protocol.
- Report each prespecified estimand, uncertainty, additional analyses, and remaining limitations.
- Report registration, ethics, sharing, funding, and conflicts using the actual study records.