PRISMA 2020 explanation and elaboration: updated guidance and exemplars for reporting systematic reviews
Разъяснение и расширение положений PRISMA 2020: обновлённое руководство и примеры представления систематических обзоров
2021-03-29
SCID: 54.1/5marw3nd
Discuss with AI
PRISMA 2020evidence-based decision makingreporting checklistreporting guidelinessystematic reviews
Figures from the paper
Abstract (AI)
The methods and results of systematic reviews should be reported in sufficient detail to allow users to assess the trustworthiness and applicability of the review findings.The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement was developed to facilitate transparent and complete reporting of systematic reviews and has been updated (to PRISMA 2020) to reflect recent advances in systematic review methodology and terminology.Here, we present the explanation and elaboration paper for PRISMA 2020, where we explain why reporting of each item is recommended, present bullet points that detail the reporting recommendations, and present examples from published reviews.We hope that changes to the content and structure of PRISMA 2020 will facilitate uptake of the guideline and lead to more transparent, complete, and accurate reporting of systematic reviews.Systematic reviews are essential for healthcare providers, policy makers, and other decision makers, who would otherwise be confronted by an overwhelming volume of research on which to base their decisions.To allow decision makers to assess the trustworthiness and applicability of review findings, reports of systematic reviews should be transparent and complete.Furthermore, such reporting should allow others to replicate or update reviews.The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement published in 2009 (hereafter referred to as PRISMA 2009) 1-12 was designed to help authors prepare transparent accounts of their reviews, and its recommendations have been widely endorsed and adopted.13 We have updated the PRISMA 2009 statement (to PRISMA 2020) to ensure currency and relevance and to reflect advances in systematic review methodology and terminology. Scope of this guidelineThe PRISMA 2020 statement has been designed primarily for systematic reviews of studies that evaluate the effects of health interventions, irrespective of the design of the included studies.However, the checklist items are applicable to reports of systematic reviews evaluating other non-health-related interventions (for example, social or educational interventions), and many items are applicable to systematic reviews with objectives other than evaluating interventions (such as evaluating aetiology, prevalence, or prognosis).PRISMA 2020 is intended for use in systematic reviews that include synthesis (such as pairwise metaanalysis or other statistical synthesis methods) or do not include synthesis (for example, because only one eligible study is identified).The PRISMA 2020 items are relevant for mixed-methods systematic reviews (which include quantitative and qualitative studies), but reporting guidelines addressing the presentation and synthesis of qualitative data should also be consulted.14 15 PRISMA 2020 can be used for original systematic reviews, updated systematic reviews, or continually updated ("living") systematic reviews.However, for updated and living systematic reviews, there may be some additional considerations that need to be addressed.Extensions to the PRISMA 2009 statement have been developed to guide reporting of network meta-analyses, 16 meta-analyses of individual participant data, 17 systematic reviews of harms, 18 systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy studies, 19 and scoping reviews 20 ; for these types of reviews we recommend authors report their review For numbered affiliations see end of the article.
Key Findings
1
PRISMA 2020 provides a 27-item checklist to guide reporting of systematic reviews.
2
Published systematic reviews are used as exemplars to illustrate how PRISMA 2020 recommendations can be implemented.
3
The article explains the rationale for each PRISMA 2020 item and provides detailed reporting recommendations.
4
Wider adoption of PRISMA 2020 is expected to improve the transparency, completeness, and accuracy of systematic-review reporting, supporting evidence-based decision-making.
Research Object
Reporting of systematic reviews guided by the PRISMA 2020 statement and checklist
Research Subject
transparency, completeness, and accuracy of reporting guided by the PRISMA 2020 checklist
Publication Details
Publication Date
2021-03-29
Journal
Publisher
ISSN
Cited by
11638
Open access PDF
Access Type
Author Information
Download PDF
Subscribe to digest
References available in scid.ai17
The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews2021
Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement2009
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement2009
PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation2018
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement2009
RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials2019
The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Studies That Evaluate Health Care Interventions: Explanation and Elaboration2009
Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement2015
The “Golden Age” of Probiotics: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized and Observational Studies in Preterm Infants2017
ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions2016
The FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship2016
The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration2009
Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015: elaboration and explanation2015
AMSTAR 2: a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomised or non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both2017
Risk‐of‐bias VISualization (robvis): An R package and Shiny web app for visualizing risk‐of‐bias assessments2020
PRISMA-S: an extension to the PRISMA Statement for Reporting Literature Searches in Systematic Reviews2021
Preferred Reporting Items for a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies2018
Cited by11
The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews2021
Components of Education 4.0 in 21st Century Skills Frameworks: Systematic Review2022
The state of evidence for social and emotional learning: A contemporary meta-analysis of universal school-based SEL interventions2023
Implementing the 27 PRISMA 2020 Statement items for systematic reviews in the sport and exercise medicine, musculoskeletal rehabilitation and sports science fields: the PERSiST (implementing Prisma in Exercise, Rehabilitation, Sport medicine and SporTs science) guidance2021
A study of the impact of project-based learning on student learning effects: a meta-analysis study2023
Digital health and telehealth in cancer care: a scoping review of reviews2023
Agentic AI: a comprehensive survey of architectures, applications, and future directions2025
Clinical and Surgical Applications of Large Language Models: A Systematic Review2024
Endoscopic Techniques for Nasal Septal Perforation Repair: A Systematic Review2022
Perceived teacher support in secondary education from 1980 to 2019: An integrative review2023
A systematic review to evaluate the risk of bias of meta-analyses reporting experimental educational interventions focused on academic performance2024