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

Заявление 2015 года о предпочтительных пунктах отчетности для протоколов систематических обзоров и метаанализов (PRISMA-P)
Lesley Stewart, David Moher, Larissa Shamseer, Mark Petticrew, Alessandro Liberati, Mike Clarke, Davina Ghersi, Paul Shekelle, Lesley A Stewart, PRISMA-P Group
2015-01-01

17-item checklistPRISMA-P 2015meta-analysis protocolsreporting guidelinesystematic review protocols
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.
1
Detailed protocols improve understanding and appraisal of planned review methods and help detect methodological modifications and selective reporting in completed reviews.
2
Funders and commissioning organizations may mandate PRISMA-P use, while peer reviewers and editors can assess protocol completeness and transparency with it.
3
The PRISMA-P 2015 reporting guideline provides a 17-item checklist for preparing and reporting robust systematic review protocols.
4
The guideline addresses limited reporting of whether systematic reviews have an underlying protocol.

systematic review protocols

completeness and transparency of reporting, including rationale, hypotheses, planned methods, and deviations in systematic review protocols

Publication Details
Publication Date
2015-01-01
Journal
Publisher
ISSN
Access Type
Author Information
Authors
Lesley Stewart
David Moher
Larissa Shamseer
Mark Petticrew
Alessandro Liberati
Mike Clarke
Davina Ghersi
Paul Shekelle
Lesley A Stewart
PRISMA-P Group
Explore further
Open the scid.ai AI chat with a ready-made request: it will find papers on a similar topic and help build a literature review.
Find similar papers in the chat
Make a presentation
100%