SPIRIT 2025 Checklist Checker

Check your clinical trial protocol against the SPIRIT 2025 reporting checklist before submission or registration.

Check my manuscript, it's free

No account required · Results in <2 minutes · PDF, Word & LaTeX

Updated June 16, 2026

What the SPIRIT 2025 checklist requires

SPIRIT (Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials) is the EQUATOR-endorsed reporting guideline for clinical trial protocols. SPIRIT 2025, which replaces SPIRIT 2013 and was developed alongside CONSORT 2025, covers administrative information, introduction, methods (participants, interventions, outcomes, assignment, data collection and management, statistics, monitoring), ethics and dissemination, and appendices, plus a schedule of enrolment, interventions, and assessments. CheckMyManuscript flags missing or structurally incomplete SPIRIT items, such as no registration, an absent schedule figure, or missing ethics and consent sections, so you can fix them before submission. It checks presence and structure, not scientific adequacy.

SPIRIT 2025 items, and what CMM checks

Each item below maps to SPIRIT 2025. CMM flags presence and structural signals; scientific and methodological adequacy is editorial and needs human review.

Administrative information

✓ CMM checks this

Descriptive title, trial registration and dataset, protocol version, funding, and roles/responsibilities.

Flag: no trial registration identifier in the protocol.

Source: consort-spirit.org · verified Jun 16, 2026

Eligibility, interventions & outcomes

✓ CMM checks this

Eligibility criteria, the interventions for each group, and clearly defined primary and secondary outcomes.

Source: consort-spirit.org · verified Jun 16, 2026

Schedule of enrolment, interventions & assessments

✓ CMM checks this

The SPIRIT figure showing the timing of enrolment, interventions, and assessments.

Flag: no SPIRIT schedule figure.

Source: consort-spirit.org · verified Jun 16, 2026

Sample size, allocation & blinding

✓ CMM checks this

How sample size was determined, sequence generation, allocation concealment, and blinding.

Source: consort-spirit.org · verified Jun 16, 2026

Monitoring, harms & auditing

✓ CMM checks this

Data monitoring arrangements, harms collection, and any auditing of trial conduct.

Source: consort-spirit.org · verified Jun 16, 2026

Ethics & dissemination

✓ CMM checks this

Ethics approval, informed-consent process, confidentiality, declaration of interests, data access, and dissemination policy.

Flag: missing informed-consent or ethics-approval section.

Source: consort-spirit.org · verified Jun 16, 2026

Scientific justification adequacy

Editorial, not auto-checkable

Whether the design, sample size, and analysis plan are scientifically sound for the question.

Editorial judgement, outside the scope of an automated checker.

Source: equator-network.org · verified Jun 16, 2026

This page reflects SPIRIT 2025, the current version, which replaces SPIRIT 2013 and was developed alongside CONSORT 2025. CheckMyManuscript checks for the presence, structure, and likely-completeness signals of each protocol item; it does not assess scientific or methodological adequacy and does not replace peer review. Verify the live checklist before submitting, last checked 16 June 2026.

SPIRIT 2025 is the reporting standard for clinical trial protocols, replacing SPIRIT 2013. Journals, funders, and ethics committees expect SPIRIT-compliant protocols, and SPIRIT 2025 was designed alongside CONSORT 2025 so your protocol and eventual trial report stay aligned. CheckMyManuscript screens your protocol for the presence and structure of each SPIRIT item so preventable gaps are caught before submission.

What CheckMyManuscript checks, and what it does not

CheckMyManuscript flags structural signals: a missing registration identifier, an absent schedule figure, undefined outcomes, or missing ethics and consent sections. It does not judge whether the trial design, sample size, or analysis plan are scientifically appropriate. Those are methodological and ethical judgements for peer and committee review. Use the checker as a pre-submission completeness screen, not a compliance certificate.

Also see: CONSORT checklist checker | PRISMA checklist checker | The Lancet submission checker

SPIRIT-specific checks

Trial registration

Flags a missing trial registration identifier in the protocol.

Schedule figure

Flags an absent SPIRIT schedule of enrolment, interventions, and assessments.

Outcomes defined

Flags if primary/secondary outcomes are not clearly defined.

Allocation & blinding

Flags missing sequence-generation, concealment, or blinding sections.

Monitoring & harms

Flags absent data-monitoring or harms sections.

Ethics & consent

Flags missing ethics-approval or informed-consent sections.

Checks relevant to this topic

Part of our 80+ automated checks

Registration in protocol

Trial registration identifier present.

Schedule figure

SPIRIT schedule figure included.

Outcomes defined

Primary/secondary outcomes specified.

Monitoring section

Data-monitoring arrangements reported.

Ethics & consent

Ethics approval and consent reported.

The practical edge your peers already use

Across disciplines and career stages, researchers reduce bottlenecks and submit with confidence: clearer drafts, easier guideline compliance, and less back and forth with co‑authors and reviewers.

I use it to review my students' papers. It instantly highlights typos, missing references, and unclear sections, helping me focus my feedback on the quality of the research instead of surface errors.

Ilyass, Professor in Mechanical Engineering, ÉTS Montréal

Ilyass

Professor in Mechanical Engineering, ÉTS Montréal

I relied on it throughout my thesis to strengthen my writing. It suggested clearer phrasing, improved flow between sections, and ensured my references were complete before the final deadline.

Manon, Master's Student in Speech Therapy

Manon

Master's Student in Speech Therapy

I write research in both Portuguese and English, and it adapts perfectly to either language. It provided precise feedback in Portuguese, helping me maintain academic tone and consistency across my drafts.

Afonso, PhD Candidate, UFPE

Afonso

PhD Candidate, UFPE

It gave excellent advice on how to rephrase and present ideas more clearly and concisely. The suggestions helped me refine my arguments and make my research more impactful.

Félix, Postdoc Researcher, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Biology

Félix

Postdoc Researcher, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Biology

A round of suggestions helped to generally refine the text of my paper and, moreover, to present some of its key points in a more focused form.

Oleg, Professor, Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University

Oleg

Professor, Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University

I use it to review my students' papers. It instantly highlights typos, missing references, and unclear sections, helping me focus my feedback on the quality of the research instead of surface errors.

Ilyass, Professor in Mechanical Engineering, ÉTS Montréal

Ilyass

Professor in Mechanical Engineering, ÉTS Montréal

I relied on it throughout my thesis to strengthen my writing. It suggested clearer phrasing, improved flow between sections, and ensured my references were complete before the final deadline.

Manon, Master's Student in Speech Therapy

Manon

Master's Student in Speech Therapy

I write research in both Portuguese and English, and it adapts perfectly to either language. It provided precise feedback in Portuguese, helping me maintain academic tone and consistency across my drafts.

Afonso, PhD Candidate, UFPE

Afonso

PhD Candidate, UFPE

It gave excellent advice on how to rephrase and present ideas more clearly and concisely. The suggestions helped me refine my arguments and make my research more impactful.

Félix, Postdoc Researcher, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Biology

Félix

Postdoc Researcher, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Biology

A round of suggestions helped to generally refine the text of my paper and, moreover, to present some of its key points in a more focused form.

Oleg, Professor, Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University

Oleg

Professor, Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University

Frequently asked questions

Use SPIRIT 2025, the current version that replaces SPIRIT 2013. It was developed together with CONSORT 2025, so a protocol prepared with SPIRIT 2025 aligns with the trial report you will later write to CONSORT 2025. Confirm the requirements of your target journal or registry.

No. CheckMyManuscript checks the presence, structure, and likely-completeness signals of SPIRIT items, for example, whether registration, a schedule figure, and ethics/consent sections exist. It does not assess whether the trial design or sample-size calculation is scientifically sound, and it does not replace peer or ethics review.

SPIRIT recommends a figure showing the schedule of enrolment, interventions, and assessments across the trial timeline. It lets reviewers and ethics committees see when each procedure occurs. A protocol without this figure is commonly queried.