PRISMA 2020 explanation and elaboration: updated guidance and exemplars for reporting systematic reviews

To ensure a systematic review is valuable to users, authors should prepare a transparent, complete, and accurate account of why the review was done, what they did, and what they found The PRISMA 2020 statement provides updated reporting guidance for systematic reviews that reflects advances in methods to identify, select, appraise, and synthesise studiesThe PRISMA 2020 statement consists of a 27-item checklist, an expanded checklist that details reporting recommendations for each item, the PRISMA 2020 abstract checklist, and revised flow diagrams for original and updated reviews We anticipate that the PRISMA 2020 statement will benefit authors, editors, and peer reviewers of systematic reviews, and different users of reviews, including guideline developers, policy makers, healthcare providers, patients, and other stakeholders on 15 April 2021 by guest. Protected by copyright.

show abstract

Section: The Prisma 2020 Statementmentioning

confidence: 99%

The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews

Page

McKenzie

Bossuyt

et al. 2021

BMJ

Self Cite

29,350

13,079

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, for updated and living systematic reviews, there may be some additional considerations that need to be addressed. Where there is relevant content from other reporting guidelines, we reference these guidelines within the items in the explanation and elaboration paper [41] (such as PRISMA-Search [42] in items 6 and 7, Synthesis without meta-analysis (SWiM) reporting guideline [27] in item 13d). Box 1 includes a glossary of terms used throughout the PRISMA 2020 statement.…”

Section: Scope Of the Guidelinementioning

confidence: 99%

“…We have prepared an updated explanation and elaboration paper, in which we explain why reporting of each item is recommended and present bullet points that detail the reporting recommendations (which we refer to as elements). [41] The bullet-point structure is new to PRISMA 2020 and has been adopted to facilitate implementation of the guidance. [60,61] An expanded checklist, which comprises an abridged version of the elements presented in the explanation and elaboration paper, with references and some examples removed, is available in S2 PRISMA 2020 expanded checklist.…”

Section: How To Use Prisma 2020mentioning

confidence: 99%

The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…All non-health science manuscripts that assess authorship issues will also be presented in the list of excluded studies with the reason for exclusion. The study selection procedures will be reported in a PRISMA ow chart [36,37].…”

Section: Data Management and Selection Processmentioning

confidence: 99%

Honorary Authorship in Health Sciences: A Protocol for a Systematic Review of Survey Research

Reynders

Riet

Girolamo

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundHonorary authorship refers to the practice of naming an individual who has made little or no contribution to a publication as an author. Honorary authorship inflates the output estimates of honorary authors and deflates the value of the work by authors who truly merit authorship. This manuscript presents the protocol for a systematic review that will assess the prevalence of five honorary authorship issues in health sciences.MethodsSurveys of authors of scientific publications in health sciences that assess prevalence estimates will be eligible. No selection criteria will be set for the time point for measuring outcomes, the setting, the language of the publication, and the publication status. Eligible manuscripts are searched from inception onwards in PubMed, Lens.org, and Dimensions.ai. Two calibrated authors will independently search, determine eligibility of manuscripts and conduct data extraction. The quality of each review outcome for each eligible manuscript will be assessed with a 14 items checklist developed and piloted for this review. Data will be qualitatively synthesized and quantitative syntheses will be performed where feasible. Criteria for precluding quantitative syntheses were defined a priori. The pooled random effects double arcsine transformed summary event rates of five outcomes on honorary authorship issues with the pertinent 95% confidence intervals will be calculated if these criteria are met. Summary estimates will be displayed after back-transformation. Stata software (Stata Corporation, College Station, Texas, USA) version 16 will be used for all statistical analyses. Statistical heterogeneity will be assessed using Tau2 and Chi2 tests and I2 to quantify inconsistency.DiscussionThe outcomes of the planned systematic review will give insights in the magnitude of honorary authorship in health sciences and could direct new research studies to develop and implement strategies to address this problem. However, the validity of the outcomes could be influenced by low response rates, inadequate research design, weighting issues, and recall bias in the eligible surveys. Systematic review registration This protocol was registered a priori in the Open Science Framework (OSF) link: https://osf.io/5nvar/

show abstract

PRISMA 2020 explanation and elaboration: updated guidance and exemplars for reporting systematic reviews

Cited by 3,893 publications

References 205 publications

The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews

The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews

The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews

Honorary Authorship in Health Sciences: A Protocol for a Systematic Review of Survey Research

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About