|
Registering and/or publishing your protocol increases the transparency of your research and the credibility of your results. It also informs the research community that you intend to conduct a review on a particular topic to avoid duplicate efforts. Protocols are most commonly developed for systematic reviews, meta-analyses, mixed-method reviews and scoping reviews. |
"Systematic reviews should build on a protocol that describes the rationale, hypothesis, and planned methods of the review. Detailed, well-described protocols can facilitate the understanding and appraisal of the review methods, as well as the detection of modifications to methods and selective reporting in completed reviews" (Moher, 2015).
Reviews conducted under the auspices of international collaborations (i.e. Cochrane, the JBI, and the Campbell Collaboration) require reviewers to register new titles and develop a protocol.
Moher, D., Shamseer, L., Clarke, M., Ghersi, D., Liberati, A., Petticrew, M., ... & Stewart, L. A. (2015). Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Syst Rev, 4(1), 1.
Zhang, Q., Yue, J., Zeng, X., Sun, Z., & Golianu, B. (2016). Acupuncture for chronic neck pain: a systematic review. PROSPERO 2015:CRD42015017178.
Zhang, Q., Yue, J., Zeng, X., Sun, Z., & Golianu, B. (2016). Acupuncture for chronic neck pain: a protocol for an updated systematic review. Systematic Reviews, 5(1), 1.
Bazzano, A. N., Kaji, A., Felker-Kantor, E., Saldanha, L., & Mason, J. (2016). Family experiences of infant and young child feeding in lower-income countries: protocol for a systematic review of qualitative studies. Systematic reviews, 5(1), 109.
O'Brien, T. D., Noyes, J., Spencer, L. H., Kubis, H. P., Hastings, R. P., Edwards, R. T., ... & Whitaker, R. (2014). ‘Keep fit’exercise interventions to improve health, fitness and well‐being of children and young people who use wheelchairs: mixed‐method systematic review protocol. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 70(12), 2942-2951.
Crick, M., Angus, D. E., & Backman, C. (2018). Exploring the role of regulation and the care of older people with depression living in long-term care? A systematic scoping review protocol. BMJ open, 8(7), e021985.
Protocol for a Cochrane Review - Standard
Note that all protocols for Cochrane Reviews of interventions and of diagnostic test accuracy published from 1 October 2013 onwards are being automatically added to PROSPERO.
You can also find protocols for Cochrane Reviews by doing a topical search in Cochrane Library (via the Wiley interface), and then select the tab for Cochrane Protocols as shown below.
Asma, S., J, J. R., Trevor, C., Daniel, P., John, N., & Paula, G. (2014). Chemotherapy, radiotherapy, chemoradiotherapy and combination therapy in localised and locally advanced pancreatic cancer. Cochrane database of systematic reviews. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD011044.
Selvan, G. K., & R, D. B. (2015). Diagnostic accuracy of different imaging modalities following computed tomography (CT) scanning for assessing the resectability with curative intent in pancreatic and periampullary cancer. Cochrane database of systematic reviews. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD011515.
| JBI update: "In order to continue to effectively process manuscripts to our quality standards, JBI Evidence Synthesis will introduce article processing charges for all protocols submitted on or after 5 January 2021. These charges will be USD$1000 for up to eight (8) typeset pages including appendices (approx. 500 words per page of text), and USD$100 for each additional typeset page. |
Instructions for developing a protocol can be found in the JBI Manual for Evidence Syntheses.
Review protocols can be located in the JBI Database of Systematic Reviews and Implementation Reports by doing a topical search and then limiting to the Publication Type of "Systematic Review Protocols."
Sheach-Leith, V., & Stephen, A. I. (2016). The experiences and support needs of adult family members who face a sudden adult death: a qualitative systematic review protocol. JBI Database of Systematic Reviews and Implementation Reports, 14(2), 93-105.
Wosinski, J., Cordier, S. B., Bachmann, A. O., Gagnon, M. P., & Kiszio, B. (2016). Effectiveness of nurse‐led healthy aging strategies for older adults living in the community: a systematic review protocol. JBI Database of Systematic Reviews and Implementation Reports, 14(2), 5-15.
Coelho, A., Parola, V., Cardoso, D., Escobar, M., & Apóstolo, J. (2016). The use of non‐pharmacological interventions for the comfort of patients in palliative care: a scoping review protocol. JBI Database of Systematic Reviews and Implementation Reports, 14(2), 64-77.
Wollscheid, S., Fang, L., Nilsen, W., Smedslund, G., Steiro, A., Hammerstrøm, K. T., & Larun, L. (2014). Effect of early, brief computerized interventions on risky alcohol and cannabis use among young people: protocol for a systematic review.
Writing and registering a protocol
Environmental Evidence journal website
Putman, B. J., & Blumstein, D. T. (2019). What is the effectiveness of using conspecific or heterospecific acoustic playbacks for the attraction of animals for wildlife management? A systematic review protocol. Environmental Evidence, 8(1), 6.
Sordello, R., De Lachapelle, F. F., Livoreil, B., & Vanpeene, S. (2019). Evidence of the environmental impact of noise pollution on biodiversity: a systematic map protocol. Environmental Evidence, 8(1), 8.
Booth, A., M. Clarke, et al. (2012). The nuts and bolts of PROSPERO: an international prospective register of systematic reviews. Syst Rev 1(1): 1-9.
Moher, D., Shamseer, L., Clarke, M., Ghersi, D., Liberati, A., Petticrew, M., ... & Stewart, L. A. (2015). Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Syst Rev, 4(1), 1.
Introducing Methods Wizard (beta-version), a piece of software to assist with writing the protocol of systematic reviews.
This online tool prompts questions to the systematic review team to answer in order to build the methods section of a protocol. This format changes the focus from writing sentences to thinking about what is needed for the review. The generated protocol text can then be copy/pasted into a Word document and edited.