The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Studies That Evaluate Health Care Interventions: Explanation and Elaboration
نویسندگان
چکیده
Systematic reviews and meta-analyses are essential to summarize evidence relating to efficacy and safety of health care interventions accurately and reliably. The clarity and transparency of these reports, however, is not optimal. Poor reporting of systematic reviews diminishes their value to clinicians, policy makers, and other users. Since the development of the QUOROM (QUality Of Reporting Of Meta-analysis) Statement--a reporting guideline published in 1999--there have been several conceptual, methodological, and practical advances regarding the conduct and reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Also, reviews of published systematic reviews have found that key information about these studies is often poorly reported. Realizing these issues, an international group that included experienced authors and methodologists developed PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses) as an evolution of the original QUOROM guideline for systematic reviews and meta-analyses of evaluations of health care interventions. The PRISMA Statement consists of a 27-item checklist and a four-phase flow diagram. The checklist includes items deemed essential for transparent reporting of a systematic review. In this Explanation and Elaboration document, we explain the meaning and rationale for each checklist item. For each item, we include an example of good reporting and, where possible, references to relevant empirical studies and methodological literature. The PRISMA Statement, this document, and the associated Web site (http://www.prisma-statement.org/) should be helpful resources to improve reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses.
منابع مشابه
پریزما؛ موارد ترجیحی در گزارش مقالات مروری منظم و فراتحلیل
Today, understanding of systematic reviews and meta-analyses and their practical use is essential for who concerned with society's health. Most of the medical reports invoked to these reviews and statements and it is necessary for scientific experts to be familiar with their performing rules and the way of their writing. The basic sciences specialists and clinical professionals study them to ...
متن کاملچگونه مقالات مروری منظم و فرا تحلیلها را گزارش کنیم
سخن سردبیر Editorial مجله دانشگاه علوم پزشکی رفسنجان دوره دوازدهم، اردیبهشت 1392، 88-87 چگونه مقالات مروری منظم و فرا تحلیلها را گزارش کنیم How to report systematic reviews and meta-analyses محسن رضائیان [1] M. Rezaeian تعداد مقالات پژوهشی اصیل که در حوزههای گوناگون معرفت بشری و بهویژه در حوزه سلامت به رشته تحریر در میآیند، با سرعت شتابانی افزایش مییابند. برای نمونه...
متن کاملA PRISMA assessment of reporting the quality of published dental systematic reviews in Iran, up to 2017
BACKGROUND AND AIM: Proper scientific reporting is necessary to ensure correct interpretation of study results by readers. Systematic reviews (SRs) are of critical importance in evidence-based dentistry. This study assessed the reporting quality of published dental SRs in Iran.METHODS: The PubMed and ISI electronic databases were searched to collect published Iranian dental SRs up to the end of...
متن کاملارزیابی کیفیت گزارش مطالعات مرور نظاممند و فراتحلیل در مجلات پرستاری و مامایی ایران
Background & Aim: In the view of the importance of evidence-based clinical practice in recent years, clinical disciplines such as nursing and midwifery have found a special need to systematic review and meta-analysis. However, systematic reviews and meta-analysises like any other studies may be poorly designed and implemented. Therefore, certain guidelines have been considered for reporting of ...
متن کاملThe PRISMA extension statement for reporting of systematic reviews incorporating network meta-analyses of health care interventions: checklist and explanations.
The PRISMA statement is a reporting guideline designed to improve the completeness of reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Authors have used this guideline worldwide to prepare their reviews for publication. In the past, these reports typically compared 2 treatment alternatives. With the evolution of systematic reviews that compare multiple treatments, some of them only indirectly...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
عنوان ژورنال:
دوره 339 شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2009