Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement
Journal of Clinical EpidemiologyPublished 24 July 2009Open access
David Moher, Alessandro Liberati, Jennifer Tetzlaff, Douglas G. Altman
Citations19,882
SJR quartileQ1
SJR score3.15
SNIP2.66
Generate an AI Snapshot to get a quick, structured summary of this paper.
Study Snapshot
ObjectiveWill appear once the snapshot is generated
MethodsWill appear once the snapshot is generated
PopulationWill appear once the snapshot is generated
Sample sizeWill appear once the snapshot is generated
OutcomesWill appear once the snapshot is generated
ResultsWill appear once the snapshot is generated
LimitationsWill appear once the snapshot is generated
A concise AI-generated summary of the paper will appear here once you click Generate AI Snapshot.
Abstract
Systematic reviews and meta-analyses have become increasingly important in health care. Clinicians read them to keep up to date with their field [1,2], and they are often used as a starting point for developing clinical practice guidelines. Granting agencies may require a systematic review to ensure there is justification for further research [3], and some health care journals are moving in this direction [4]. As with all research, the value of a systematic review depends on what was done, what was found, and the clarity of reporting.
Keywords
Decision SciencesHealth ProfessionsEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
PLoS MedicineThe PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Studies That Evaluate Health Care Interventions: Explanation and Elaboration
27,883 Citations2009Alessandro Liberati, Douglas G. Altman +8 more
The meaning and rationale for each checklist item is explained, and an example of good reporting is included and, where possible, references to relevant empirical studies and methodological literature are included.
Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions
24,936 Citations2008
BMJGRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations
22,066 Citations2008Gordon Guyatt, Andrew D Oxman +5 more
The advantages of the GRADE system are explored, which is increasingly being adopted by organisations worldwide and which is often praised for its high level of consistency.
The LancetImproving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement
4,808 Citations1999David Moher, Fadi Hammal +4 more
This report hopes this report will generate further thought about ways to improve the quality of reports of meta-analyses of RCTs and that interested readers, reviewers, researchers, and editors will use the QUOROM statement and generate ideas for its improvement.
Annals of Internal MedicineThe Revised CONSORT Statement for Reporting Randomized Trials: Explanation and Elaboration
3,805 Citations2001D G Altman, Kenneth F. Schulz +7 more
The CONSORT statement (or simply CONSORT) comprises a checklist of essential items that should be included in reports of RCTs and a diagram for documenting the flow of participants through a trial, aimed at first reports of two-group parallel designs.
Annals of Internal MedicineStrengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE): Explanation and Elaboration
3,523 Citations2007Jan P. Vandenbroucke, Erik von Elm +8 more
Nature GeneticsReplication validity of genetic association studies
1,826 Citations2001John P. A. Ioannidis, Evangelia Ntzani +2 more
It is concluded that a systematic meta-analytic approach may assist in estimating population-wide effects of genetic risk factors in human disease.
JAMAEmpirical Evidence for Selective Reporting of Outcomes in Randomized Trials
1,806 Citations2004An‐Wen Chan, Asbjørn Hróbjartsson +3 more
The reporting of trial outcomes is not only frequently incomplete but also biased and inconsistent with protocols and Published articles, as well as reviews that incorporate them, may therefore be unreliable and overestimate the benefits of an intervention.
BMJThe case of the misleading funnel plot
1,758 Citations2006Joseph Lau, John P. A. Ioannidis +3 more
Evidence based medicine insists on rigorous standards to appraise clinical interventions, and failure to apply the same rules to its own tools could be equally damaging.
BMJSystematic reviews of evaluations of diagnostic and screening tests
1,332 Citations2001Jonathan J Deeks
This article concentrates on the dimensions of study quality and the advantages and disadvantages of different summary statistics for combining studies in meta-analysis.
New England Journal of MedicineMeta-Analyses of Randomized Controlled Trials
1,268 Citations1987Henry S. Sacks, Jayne Berrier +3 more
PsychometrikaH.R. Rothstein, A.J. Sutton, & M. Borenstein (Eds.) (2005). Publication bias in meta-analysis: Prevention, assessment and adjustments. NewYork: Wiley, xvii+356 p. US$100.00. ISBN: 0-470-87014-1.
1,264 Citations2007Wolfgang Viechtbauer
Pure Amsterdam UMCThe STARD statement for reporting studies of diagnostic accuracy: explanation and elaboration
1,233 Citations2003
The LancetSelective serotonin reuptake inhibitors in childhood depression: systematic review of published versus unpublished data
1,062 Citations2004Craig Whittington, Timothy J. Kendall +4 more
A meta-analysis of data from randomised controlled trials that evaluated an SSRI versus placebo in participants aged 5-18 years and that were published in a peer-reviewed journal or were unpublished and included in a review by the Committee on Safety of Medicines indicated that risks could outweigh benefits of these drugs to treat depression in children and young people.
PLoS MedicineEpidemiology and Reporting Characteristics of Systematic Reviews
876 Citations2007David Moher, Jennifer Tetzlaff +3 more
There were large differences between Cochrane reviews and non-Cochrane reviews in the quality of reporting several characteristics, and the view that readers should not accept SRs uncritically is substantiated.
Annals of Internal MedicineThe Medical Review Article: State of the Science
854 Citations1987Cynthia D. Mulrow
It is indicated that current medical reviews do not routinely use scientific methods to identify, assess, and synthesize information.
Journal of Health Services Research & PolicyTowards systematic reviews that inform health care management and policy-making
593 Citations2005John N. Lavis, Huw Davies +4 more
A systematic review of studies of decision-making by health care managers and policy-makers and the websites of research funders, producers/purveyors of research, and journals that include them among their target audiences found that contextual factors were rarely highlighted, recommendations were often provided and graded entry formats were rarely used.
American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care MedicineAn Official ATS Statement: Grading the Quality of Evidence and Strength of Recommendations in ATS Guidelines and Recommendations
580 Citations2006Holger J. Schünemann, Roman Jaeschke +15 more
This article informs ATS guideline developers, investigators, and those interpreting future A TS guidelines that follow the GRADE approach about the methodology and applicability of ATS guidelines and recommendations.
Statistics in MedicinePractical methodology of meta‐analyses (overviews) using updated individual patient data
492 Citations1995Lesley Stewart, Cochrane Working Group On Meta‐Analysis Using Individual Patient Data
Meta-analyses using updated individual patient data may provide the most reliable means of combining data from similar randomized controlled trials, and practical advice on initiating and maintaining collaboration and methods of data checking and validation are given.
Canadian Medical Association JournalOutcome reporting bias in randomized trials funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research
446 Citations2004A.-W. Chan
Whether outcome reporting bias would be present in a cohort of government-funded trials subjected to rigorous peer review and whether primary outcomes specified in trial protocols were compared with those reported in publications is compared.
BMJAssessment of methodological quality of primary studies by systematic reviews: results of the metaquality cross sectional study
237 Citations2005Lorenzo Moja, Elena Telaro +4 more
Cochrane reviews fared better than systematic reviews published in paper based journals in terms of assessment of methodological quality of primary studies, although they both largely failed to take it into account in the interpretation of results.
The LancetPutting clinical trials into context
188 Citations2005Charles Y.F. Young, Richard Horton
In recognition that journal editors have a key part to play in ensuring that published research is presented in a way that clearly illustrates why it was necessary and what impact a particular trial has on the existing state of knowledge, The Lancet has decided to update its policies in this area.
Journal of Bone and Joint SurgeryMeta-Analyses in Orthopaedic Surgery
186 Citations2001Mohit Bhandari, Farrah Morrow +2 more
The majority of meta-analyses on orthopaedic-surgery-related topics have methodological limitations, and the ultimate quality of a meta-analysis depends on the quality of the primary studies on which it is based.
JAMAPublishing Protocols of Systematic Reviews
168 Citations2002Chris Silagy, Philippa Middleton +1 more
A retrospective comparative study to assess the extent to which the content of published Cochrane reviews had changed compared with their previously published protocols found that a large number of changes were made to Cochrane Reviews.
BMJCompliance with QUOROM and quality of reporting of overlapping meta-analyses on the role of acetylcysteine in the prevention of contrast associated nephropathy: case study
148 Citations2006Giuseppe Biondi‐Zoccai, Marzia Lotrionte +8 more
Multiple systematic reviews on the same clinical topic varied in quality of reporting and recommendations, mainly because of greater emphasis of the Oxman and Guyatt scores on the appraisal of bias in selection and validity assessment.
Critical CareA systematic evaluation of the quality of meta-analyses in the critical care literature
142 Citations2005Anthony Delaney, Sean M. Bagshaw +4 more
The overall quality of the reports of meta-analyses available to critical care physicians is poor and physicians should critically evaluate these studies prior to considering applying the results of these studies in their clinical practice.
Archives of Internal MedicineAcetylcysteine in the Prevention of Contrast-Induced Nephropathy
133 Citations2006Sean M. Bagshaw, Finlay A. McAlister +2 more
It is demonstrated that 34 empirical studies have not yet conclusively resolved the role of acetylcysteine for prevention of contrast-induced nephropathy and broader lessons learned are considered for the medical and research communities.
Annals of Internal MedicineAspirin as an Adjunct to Screening for Prevention of Sporadic Colorectal Cancer: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis
133 Citations2001Uri Ladabaum, Cathy Lee Chopra +4 more
A decision analytic model was constructed to explore the incremental clinical and economic effects of aspirin when it is added to an accepted screening program for sporadic colorectal cancer and the potential role of aspirin chemoprevention in an unscreened population and the effects of screening when added to existing aspirin use.
Canadian Medical Association JournalClinical trial registration: a statement from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors
118 Citations2004Carlo DeAngelis
A large number of participants believe that their participation will contribute to improved health for others and that researchers will minimize risks to participants, in return for the altruism and trust.
BMJNumber of published systematic reviews and global burden of disease: database analysis
114 Citations2003George Swingler, Jimmy Volmink +1 more
The number of systematic reviews in two important databases and the burden of disease (globally and in established market economies) across disease categories were estimated and Spearman correlations between these numbers and those numbers were estimated.
The LancetSystematic reviews: when is an update an update?
108 Citations2006David Moher, Alexander Tsertsvadze
Annals of Emergency MedicineEvaluating the quality of systematic reviews in the emergency medicine literature
81 Citations2001Karen D. Kelly, Andrew H. Travers +3 more
The results of the study indicate that many of the systematic reviews published in the emergency medicine literature contain major flaws; reviews with poor methodology may limit the validity of reported results.
Journal of Clinical EpidemiologyValue judgments in the analysis and synthesis of evidence
68 Citations2008Daniel Strech, Jon C. Tilburt
The principal role of value judgments in the analysis and synthesis of evidence as they are involved in systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and health technology assessments is described and an outline of how to enhance the appropriate role is proposed in the process of analyzing and synthesizing evidence is proposed.
Anesthesia & AnalgesiaExamining the Evidence in Anesthesia Literature: A Critical Appraisal of Systematic Reviews
58 Citations2001P. Choi, Stephen H. Halpern +4 more
A systematic review of published systematic reviews in perioperative medicine to summarize the areas currently covered by this type of literature, to evaluate the quality of systematic reviews, and to assess some of the methodologic and reporting issues that are unique to systematic reviews.
Evidence-Based DentistryThe quality of systematic reviews in dentistry
17 Citations2004Derek Richards
The quality of systematic reviews in dentistry could be improved if future clinical decisions are to be based upon systematic reviews, it is imperative that reviews address clinically-relevant, focused questions, and follow a transparent, well-designed protocol.