Mapping of reporting guidance for systematic reviews and meta-analyses generated a comprehensive item bank for future reporting guidelines

Matthew J Page, Joanne E McKenzie, Patrick M Bossuyt, Isabelle Boutron, Tammy Hoffmann, Cynthia D Mulrow, Larissa Shamseer, David Moher

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

3 Citations (Scopus)
6 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Objectives: The aim of the study was to generate a comprehensive bank of systematic review (SR) reporting items to inform an update of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2009 statement. Methods: We searched the Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research Network library in May 2019 to identify all reporting guidelines for SRs that were published after 2009, regardless of the scope of the guideline. We also conducted a selective review of four guidance manuals for SRs, three tools for assessing the risk of bias in SRs, six meta-research studies evaluating the reporting quality of SRs using a tailored checklist, and five reporting guidelines for other study designs. One author screened and selected sources for inclusion, extracted reporting guidance from sources, and mapped guidance against the PRISMA 2009 checklist items. Results: We included 60 sources providing guidance on reporting of SRs and meta-analyses. From these, we collated a list of 221 unique reporting items. Items were categorized into title (four items), abstract (10 items), introduction (12 items), methods (111 items), results (61 items), discussion (12 items), funding and conflicts of interest (four items), administrative information (three items), and data availability (four items). This exercise generated 175 reporting items that could be added to the guidance in the PRISMA 2009 statement. Conclusion: Generation of a comprehensive item bank through review and mapping of the literature facilitates identification of missing items and those needing modification, which may not otherwise be identified by the guideline development team or from other activities commonly used to develop reporting guidelines.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)60-68
Number of pages9
JournalJournal of Clinical Epidemiology
Volume118
Early online date15 Nov 2019
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Feb 2020

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Mapping of reporting guidance for systematic reviews and meta-analyses generated a comprehensive item bank for future reporting guidelines'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this