PRISMA statement and PROSPERO

PRISMA statement and PROSPERO

Extending the PRISMA statement to equity-focused systematic reviews (PRISMA-E 2012): explanation and elaboration

BACKGROUND The promotion of health equity, the absence of avoidable and unfair differences in health outcomes, is a global imperative. Systematic reviews are an important source of evidence for health decision-makers, but have been found to lack assessments of the intervention effects on health equity. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) is a 27 item ...

PRISMA Statement To the Editor : I n their recent commentary

To the Editor: In their recent commentary Takkouche and Norman seriously misrepresent the PRISMA guideline for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses. They state that PRISMA “demand s the prior registration of the protocol of any systematic review and meta-analysis, requiring that this protocol should be made accessible before any hands-on work is done.” No such demands are made in PRIS...

Compliance of systematic reviews in ophthalmology with the PRISMA statement

BACKGROUND Systematic reviews and meta-analyses are becoming increasingly important methods to summarize published research. Studies of ophthalmology may present additional challenges because of their potentially complex study designs. The aim of this study was to evaluate the reporting quality of systematic reviews and meta-analyses on topics in ophthalmology to determine compliance with the P...

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

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 developm...