Top

Published in:

Open Access 01-12-2016 | Editorial

Implementing PRISMA-P: recommendations for prospective authors

Authors: David Moher, Lesley Stewart, Paul Shekelle

Published in: Systematic Reviews | Issue 1/2016

Excerpt

Systematic reviews have become very popular. A recent estimate suggests that 22 new systematic reviews are published daily [1]. One reason for this interest is that they serve many purposes. For example, the influential Institute of Medicine has indicated that a systematic review is an essential component when developing clinical practice guidelines within the USA [2]. Some granting agencies are now advocating for the use of systematic reviews as an evidence-based rationale for the conduct of a proposed randomized trial [3]. And journals are now demanding the use of systematic reviews to provide readers with context of the results of a clinical trial [4]. …

Available only for authorised users

Page MJ, Shamseer L, Altman DG, Tetzlaff JM, Sampson M, Tricco AC, et al. Epidemiology and reporting characteristics of systematic reviews: 2014 update. 23rd Annual Cochrane Colloquium. Vienna, Austria; 2015

IOM (Institute of Medicine). Clinical practice guidelines we can trust. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2011.

NHS Scotland, Chief Scientist Office. http://www.cso.scot.nhs.uk/funding-2/response-mode-funding-schemes/

Kleinert S, Benham L, Collingridge D, Summerskill W, Horton R. Further emphasis on research in context. Lancet. 2014;384:2176–77.PubMedCrossRef

Silagy CA, Middleton P, Hopewell S. Publishing protocols of systematic reviews: comparing what was done to what was planned. JAMA. 2002;287(21):2831-4.

Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Kirkham J, Dwan K, Kramer S, Green S, et al. Bias due to selective inclusion and reporting of outcomes and analyses in systematic reviews of randomised trials of healthcare interventions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014;10, MR000035.PubMed

Moher D, Shamseer L, Clarke M, Ghersi D, Liberati A, Petticrew M, et al. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Syst Rev. 2015;4(1):1.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

Shamseer L, Moher D, Clarke M, Ghersi D, Liberati A, Petticrew M, et al. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015: elaboration and explanation. BMJ. 2015;349:g7647.PubMedCrossRef

Turner L, Shamseer L, Altman DG, Schulz KF, Moher D. Does use of the CONSORT Statement impact the completeness of reporting of randomised controlled trials published in medical journals? A Cochrane review Syst Rev. 2012;1:60.PubMed

Title: Implementing PRISMA-P: recommendations for prospective authors
Authors: David Moher
Lesley Stewart
Paul Shekelle
Publication date: 01-12-2016
Publisher: BioMed Central
Published in: Systematic Reviews / Issue 1/2016
Electronic ISSN: 2046-4053
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-016-0191-y

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Implementing PRISMA-P: recommendations for prospective authors

Excerpt

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Excerpt

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2016

An evaluation of psychometric properties of caregiver burden outcome measures used in caregivers of children with cerebral palsy: a systematic review protocol

Effects of prenatal childbirth education for partners of pregnant women on paternal postnatal mental health: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol

Clinical and surgical risk factors in the development of proliferative vitreoretinopathy following retinal detachment surgery: a systematic review protocol

The timing of complementary feeding in preterm infants and the effect on overweight: study protocol for a systematic review

International law’s effects on health and its social determinants: protocol for a systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression analysis

The impact of mHealth interventions on health systems: a systematic review protocol