Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement - PubMed (original) (raw)

Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement

David Moher et al. Syst Rev. 2015.

Abstract

Systematic reviews should build on a protocol that describes the rationale, hypothesis, and planned methods of the review; few reviews report whether a protocol exists. Detailed, well-described protocols can facilitate the understanding and appraisal of the review methods, as well as the detection of modifications to methods and selective reporting in completed reviews. We describe the development of a reporting guideline, the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses for Protocols 2015 (PRISMA-P 2015). PRISMA-P consists of a 17-item checklist intended to facilitate the preparation and reporting of a robust protocol for the systematic review. Funders and those commissioning reviews might consider mandating the use of the checklist to facilitate the submission of relevant protocol information in funding applications. Similarly, peer reviewers and editors can use the guidance to gauge the completeness and transparency of a systematic review protocol submitted for publication in a journal or other medium.

PubMed Disclaimer

Cited by

Effect of survodutide, a glucagon and GLP-1 receptor dual agonist, on weight loss: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Wan H, Xu N, Wang L, Liu Y, Fatahi S, Sohouli MH, Guimarães NS. Wan H, et al. Diabetol Metab Syndr. 2024 Nov 6;16(1):264. doi: 10.1186/s13098-024-01501-x. Diabetol Metab Syndr. 2024. PMID: 39508238
Prevalence and factors associated with the perpetration and victimization of teen dating violence: A systematic review and meta-analysis protocol.
Ribeiro NQ, de Mendonça CR, da Costa WP, Terra LF, da Cruz RVP, Sorpreso ICE, Noll PRES, Noll M. Ribeiro NQ, et al. MethodsX. 2024 Oct 10;13:103003. doi: 10.1016/j.mex.2024.103003. eCollection 2024 Dec. MethodsX. 2024. PMID: 39507383 Free PMC article.
Impact of COVID-19 on nephropathy in diabetes mellitus type-II patients: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis.
Azim T, Khan AH, Sadiq F, Sulaiman SAS, Khan A, Ain Q. Azim T, et al. BMC Nephrol. 2024 Nov 6;25(1):399. doi: 10.1186/s12882-024-03821-6. BMC Nephrol. 2024. PMID: 39506723

References

1. Bastian H, Glasziou P, Chalmers I. Seventy-five trials and eleven systematic reviews a day: how will we ever keep up? PLoS Med. 2010;7(9):e1000326. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000326. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
1. Chan AW, Hróbjartsson A, Haahr MT, Gøtzsche PC, Altman DG. Empirical evidence for selective reporting of outcomes in randomized trials: comparison of protocols to published articles. JAMA. 2004;291(20):2457–2465. doi: 10.1001/jama.291.20.2457. - DOI - PubMed
1. Kirkham JJ, Altman DG, Williamson PR. Bias due to changes in specified outcomes during the systematic review process. PLoS ONE. 2010;5(3):e9810. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0009810. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
1. Kirkham JJ, Dwan KM, Altman DG, Gamble C, Dodd S, Smyth R, Williamson PR. The impact of outcome reporting bias in randomised controlled trials on a cohort of systematic reviews. BMJ. 2010;340:c365. doi: 10.1136/bmj.c365. - DOI - PubMed
1. Dwan K, Gamble C, Williamson PR, Kirkham JJ, Reporting Bias Group Systematic review of the empirical evidence of study publication bias and outcome reporting bias—an updated review. PLoS ONE. 2013;8(7):e66844. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0066844. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement - PubMed (original) (raw)