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

PRISMA-P Group; D. Moher; L. Shamseer; M. Clarke; D. Ghersi; A. Liberati; M. Petticrew; P. Shekelle; L.A. Stewart

doi:10.1186/2046-4053-4-1

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

PRISMA-P Group, D. Moher, L. Shamseer, M. Clarke, D. Ghersi, A. Liberati, M. Petticrew, P. Shekelle, L.A. Stewart

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

16308 Citations (Scopus)

84 Downloads (Pure)

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.

Original language	English
Number of pages	9
Journal	Systematic Reviews
Volume	4
Issue number	1
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-4-1
Publication status	Published - 1 Jan 2015
Externally published	Yes

Bibliographical note

This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Keywords

Systematic Review
Knowledge Translation
Reporting Guideline
Checklist Item
Systematic Review Protocol

Access to Document

10.1186/2046-4053-4-1Licence: CC BY

PublishedFinal published version, 700 KBLicence: CC BY

Cite this

@article{ee15a12586e0484b860de167fc79cea8,

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

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.",

keywords = "Systematic Review, Knowledge Translation, Reporting Guideline, Checklist Item, Systematic Review Protocol",

author = "{PRISMA-P Group} and D. Moher and L. Shamseer and M. Clarke and D. Ghersi and A. Liberati and M. Petticrew and P. Shekelle and L.A. Stewart and D.G. Altman and A. Booth and A.-W. Chan and S. Chang and T. Clifford and K. Dickersin and M. Egger and P.C. G{\o}tzsche and J.M. Grimshaw and T. Groves and M. Helfand and J. Higgins and T. Lasserson and J. Lau and K. Lohr and J. McGowan and C. Mulrow and M. Norton and M. Page and M. Sampson and H. Sch{\"u}nemann and I. Simera and W. Summerskill and J. Tetzlaff and T.A. Trikalinos and D. Tovey and L. Turner and E. Whitlock",

note = "This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.",

year = "2015",

month = jan,

day = "1",

doi = "10.1186/2046-4053-4-1",

language = "English",

volume = "4",

journal = "Systematic Reviews",

issn = "2046-4053",

publisher = "Springer Verlag",

number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement

AU - PRISMA-P Group

AU - Moher, D.

AU - Shamseer, L.

AU - Clarke, M.

AU - Ghersi, D.

AU - Liberati, A.

AU - Petticrew, M.

AU - Shekelle, P.

AU - Stewart, L.A.

AU - Altman, D.G.

AU - Booth, A.

AU - Chan, A.-W.

AU - Chang, S.

AU - Clifford, T.

AU - Dickersin, K.

AU - Egger, M.

AU - Gøtzsche, P.C.

AU - Grimshaw, J.M.

AU - Groves, T.

AU - Helfand, M.

AU - Higgins, J.

AU - Lasserson, T.

AU - Lau, J.

AU - Lohr, K.

AU - McGowan, J.

AU - Mulrow, C.

AU - Norton, M.

AU - Page, M.

AU - Sampson, M.

AU - Schünemann, H.

AU - Simera, I.

AU - Summerskill, W.

AU - Tetzlaff, J.

AU - Trikalinos, T.A.

AU - Tovey, D.

AU - Turner, L.

AU - Whitlock, E.

N1 - This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

PY - 2015/1/1

Y1 - 2015/1/1

N2 - 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.

AB - 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.

KW - Systematic Review

KW - Knowledge Translation

KW - Reporting Guideline

KW - Checklist Item

KW - Systematic Review Protocol

UR - https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-84920780781&doi=10.1186%2f2046-4053-4-1&partnerID=40&md5=4243d823be68d21460a710b8f95943b7

U2 - 10.1186/2046-4053-4-1

DO - 10.1186/2046-4053-4-1

M3 - Article

SN - 2046-4053

VL - 4

JO - Systematic Reviews

JF - Systematic Reviews

IS - 1

ER -

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

Abstract

Bibliographical note

Keywords

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this