Updating guidance for reporting systematic reviews: development of the PRISMA 2020 statement

被引:401
作者
Page, Matthew J. [1 ]
McKenzie, Joanne E. [1 ]
Bossuyt, Patrick M. [2 ]
Boutron, Isabelle [3 ]
Hoffmann, Tammy C. [4 ]
Mulrow, Cynthia D. [5 ]
Shamseer, Larissa [6 ]
Tetzlaff, Jennifer M. [7 ]
Moher, David [6 ,8 ]
机构
[1] Monash Univ, Sch Publ Hlth & Prevent Med, Melbourne, Vic, Australia
[2] Univ Amsterdam, Amsterdam Univ Med Ctr, Dept Clin Epidemiol Biostat & Bioinformat, Amsterdam, Netherlands
[3] Univ Paris, Ctr Epidemiol & Stat CRESS, INSERM, F-75004 Paris, France
[4] Bond Univ, Inst Evidence Based Healthcare, Fac Hlth Sci & Med, Gold Coast, Australia
[5] Univ Texas Hlth Sci Ctr San Antonio, San Antonio, TX 78229 USA
[6] Univ Ottawa, Sch Epidemiol & Publ Hlth, Fac Med, Ottawa, ON, Canada
[7] Evidence Partners, Ottawa, ON, Canada
[8] Ottawa Hosp Res Inst, Ctr Journalol, Clin Epidemiol Program, Ottawa, ON, Canada
基金
英国医学研究理事会; 澳大利亚国家健康与医学研究理事会; 澳大利亚研究理事会;
关键词
Systematic reviews; Meta-analysis; Reporting guidelines; Transparency; Reproducibility; EXTENSION STATEMENT; METAANALYSIS; TRIAL; INTERVENTIONS; ACCURACY; IMPACT; TOOL;
D O I
10.1016/j.jclinepi.2021.02.003
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Objectives: To describe the processes used to update the PRISMA 2009 statement for reporting systematic reviews, present results of a survey conducted to inform the update, summarize decisions made at the PRISMA update meeting, and describe and justify changes made to the guideline.& nbsp; Methods: We reviewed 60 documents with reporting guidance for systematic reviews to generate suggested modifications to the PRISMA 2009 statement. We invited 220 systematic review methodologists and journal editors to complete a survey about the suggested modifications. The results of these projects were discussed at a 21-member in-person meeting. Following the meeting, we drafted the PRISMA 2020 statement and refined it based on feedback from co-authors and a convenience sample of 15 systematic reviewers.& nbsp; Results: The review of 60 documents revealed that all topics addressed by the PRISMA 2009 statement could be modified. Of the 110 survey respondents, more than 66% recommended keeping six of the original checklist items as they were and modifying 15 of them using wording suggested by us. Attendees at the in-person meeting supported the revised wording for several items but suggested rewording for most to enhance clarity, and further refinements were made over six drafts of the guideline.& nbsp; Conclusions: The PRISMA 2020 statement consists of updated reporting guidance for systematic reviews. We hope that providing this detailed description of the development process will enhance the acceptance and uptake of the guideline and assist those developing and updating future reporting guidelines. (c) 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:103 / 112
页数:10
相关论文
共 40 条
  • [1] Impact of an online writing aid tool for writing a randomized trial report: the COBWEB (Consort-based WEB tool) randomized controlled trial
    Barnes, Caroline
    Boutron, Isabelle
    Giraudeau, Bruno
    Porcher, Raphael
    Altman, Douglas G.
    Ravaud, Philippe
    [J]. BMC MEDICINE, 2015, 13
  • [2] PRISMA for Abstracts: Reporting Systematic Reviews in Journal and Conference Abstracts
    Beller, Elaine M.
    Glasziou, Paul P.
    Altman, Douglas G.
    Hopewell, Sally
    Bastian, Hilda
    Chalmers, Iain
    Gotzsche, Peter C.
    Lasserson, Toby
    Tovey, David
    [J]. PLOS MEDICINE, 2013, 10 (04)
  • [3] Bian Z., PREFERRED REPORTING
  • [5] Bossuyt PM, 2015, BMJ-BRIT MED J, V351, DOI [10.1136/bmj.h5527, 10.1148/radiol.2015151516, 10.1373/clinchem.2015.246280]
  • [6] CONSORT Statement for Randomized Trials of Nonpharmacologic Treatments: A 2017 Update and a CONSORT Extension for Nonpharmacologic Trial Abstracts
    Boutron, Isabelle
    Altman, Douglas G.
    Moher, David
    Schulz, Kenneth F.
    Ravaud, Philippe
    [J]. ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2017, 167 (01) : 40 - +
  • [7] Consort 2010 statement: extension to cluster randomised trials
    Campbell, Marion K.
    Piaggio, Gilda
    Elbourne, Diana R.
    Altman, Douglas G.
    [J]. BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2012, 345
  • [8] Accuracy in detecting inadequate research reporting by early career peer reviewers using an online CONSORT-based peer-review tool (COBPeer) versus the usual peer-review process: a cross-sectional diagnostic study
    Chauvin, Anthony
    Ravaud, Philippe
    Moher, David
    Schriger, David
    Hopewell, Sally
    Shanahan, Daniel
    Alam, Sabina
    Baron, Gabriel
    Regnaux, Jean-Philippe
    Crequit, Perrine
    Martinez, Valeria
    Riveros, Carolina
    Le Cleach, Laurence
    Recchioni, Alessandro
    Altman, Douglas G.
    Boutron, Isabelle
    [J]. BMC MEDICINE, 2019, 17 (01)
  • [9] Collins GS, 2015, ANN INTERN MED, V162, P55, DOI [10.7326/M14-0697, 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.11.010, 10.1186/s12916-014-0241-z, 10.1038/bjc.2014.639, 10.7326/M14-0698, 10.1002/bjs.9736, 10.1136/bmj.g7594, 10.1016/j.eururo.2014.11.025]
  • [10] Development process of a consensus-driven CONSORT extension for randomised trials using an adaptive design
    Dimairo, Munyaradzi
    Coates, Elizabeth
    Pallmann, Philip
    Todd, Susan
    Julious, Steven A.
    Jaki, Thomas
    Wason, James
    Mander, Adrian P.
    Weir, Christopher J.
    Koenig, Franz
    Walton, Marc K.
    Biggs, Katie
    Nicholl, Jon
    Hamasaki, Toshimitsu
    Proschan, Michael A.
    Scott, John A.
    Ando, Yuki
    Hind, Daniel
    Altman, Douglas G.
    [J]. BMC MEDICINE, 2018, 16