Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015: elaboration and explanation.
Larissa Shamseer,David Moher,Mike Clarke,Davina Ghersi,Alessandro Liberati,Mark Petticrew,Paul G. Shekelle,Lesley A. Stewart +7 more
TLDR
The PRISMA-P checklist as mentioned in this paper provides 17 items considered to be essential and minimum components of a systematic review or meta-analysis protocol, as well as a model example from an existing published protocol.Abstract:
Protocols of systematic reviews and meta-analyses allow for planning and documentation of review methods, act as a guard against arbitrary decision making during review conduct, enable readers to assess for the presence of selective reporting against completed reviews, and, when made publicly available, reduce duplication of efforts and potentially prompt collaboration. Evidence documenting the existence of selective reporting and excessive duplication of reviews on the same or similar topics is accumulating and many calls have been made in support of the documentation and public availability of review protocols. Several efforts have emerged in recent years to rectify these problems, including development of an international register for prospective reviews (PROSPERO) and launch of the first open access journal dedicated to the exclusive publication of systematic review products, including protocols (BioMed Central's Systematic Reviews). Furthering these efforts and building on the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) guidelines, an international group of experts has created a guideline to improve the transparency, accuracy, completeness, and frequency of documented systematic review and meta-analysis protocols--PRISMA-P (for protocols) 2015. The PRISMA-P checklist contains 17 items considered to be essential and minimum components of a systematic review or meta-analysis protocol.This PRISMA-P 2015 Explanation and Elaboration paper provides readers with a full understanding of and evidence about the necessity of each item as well as a model example from an existing published protocol. This paper should be read together with the PRISMA-P 2015 statement. Systematic review authors and assessors are strongly encouraged to make use of PRISMA-P when drafting and appraising review protocols.read more
Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
Systematic review and meta-analysis
TL;DR: In this review the usual methods applied in systematic reviews and meta-analyses are outlined, and the most common procedures for combining studies with binary outcomes are described, illustrating how they can be done using Stata commands.
Book
Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions
Julian P T Higgins,Sally Green +1 more
TL;DR: The Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions is the official document that describes in detail the process of preparing and maintaining Cochrane systematic reviews on the effects of healthcare interventions.
Journal ArticleDOI
The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews
Matthew J. Page,Joanne E. McKenzie,Patrick M.M. Bossuyt,Isabelle Boutron,Tammy Hoffmann,Cynthia D. Mulrow,Larissa Shamseer,Jennifer Tetzlaff,Elie A. Akl,Sue E. Brennan,Roger Chou,Julie Glanville,Jeremy M. Grimshaw,Asbjørn Hróbjartsson,Manoj M. Lalu,Tianjing Li,Elizabeth Loder,Evan Mayo-Wilson,Steve McDonald,Luke A McGuinness,Lesley A. Stewart,James Thomas,Andrea C. Tricco,Vivian Welch,Penny Whiting,David Moher +25 more
TL;DR: The preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement as discussed by the authors was designed to help systematic reviewers transparently report why the review was done, what the authors did, and what they found.
Journal ArticleDOI
Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement
David Moher,Larissa Shamseer,Mike Clarke,Davina Ghersi,Alessandro Liberati,Mark Petticrew,Paul G. Shekelle,Lesley A. Stewart +7 more
TL;DR: A reporting guideline is described, the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses for Protocols 2015 (PRISMA-P 2015), which consists of a 17-item checklist intended to facilitate the preparation and reporting of a robust protocol for the systematic review.
Ítems de referencia para publicar Protocolos de Revisiones Sistemáticas y Metaanálisis: Declaración PRISMA-P 2015 Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement
David Moher,Larissa Shamseer,Michael Clarke,Davina Ghersi,Alessandro Liberati,Mark Petticrew,Lesley A. Stewart +6 more
References
More filters
Journal Article
Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA Statement.
TL;DR: The QUOROM Statement (QUality Of Reporting Of Meta-analyses) as mentioned in this paper was developed to address the suboptimal reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Journal ArticleDOI
Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses
TL;DR: A new quantity is developed, I 2, which the authors believe gives a better measure of the consistency between trials in a meta-analysis, which is susceptible to the number of trials included in the meta- analysis.
Journal ArticleDOI
Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement
TL;DR: A structured summary is provided including, as applicable, background, objectives, data sources, study eligibility criteria, participants, interventions, study appraisal and synthesis methods, results, limitations, conclusions and implications of key findings.
Journal ArticleDOI
The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Studies That Evaluate Health Care Interventions: Explanation and Elaboration
Alessandro Liberati,Douglas G. Altman,Jennifer Tetzlaff,Cynthia D. Mulrow,Peter C Gøtzsche,John P. A. Ioannidis,Mike Clarke,Mike Clarke,Philip J. Devereaux,Jos Kleijnen,David Moher +10 more
TL;DR: An Explanation and Elaboration of the PRISMA Statement is presented and updated guidelines for the reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses are presented.
Journal ArticleDOI
The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials
Julian P T Higgins,Douglas G. Altman,Peter C Gøtzsche,Peter Jüni,David Moher,Andrew D Oxman,Jelena Savović,Kenneth F. Schulz,Laura Weeks,Jonathan A C Sterne +9 more
TL;DR: The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias aims to make the process clearer and more accurate.