Skip to Main Content
QUL logo

Systematic Reviews & Other Syntheses

Introduction

Before embarking on a systematic review or other synthesis, make sure you have an understanding of reporting standards to help you properly plan and execute your review, particularly if publication is the intent.

Reviews conducted under the auspices of international evidence synthesis collaborations like Cochrane, JBI, Campbell Collaboration, and the Collaboration of Environmental Evidence may have additional reporting requirements. Refer to the reviewer manuals and guides from international collaborations as appropriate.

The PRISMA Statement

PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses)

PRISMA provides guidelines for transparent reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses [1,2]. The PRISMA Checklist summarizes the preferred reporting and layout of systematic reviews and is a helpful resource to refer to throughout the process.

PRISMA extensions have been developed to facilitate the reporting of different types or aspects of systematic reviews, including:

•    PRISMA for Abstracts
•    PRISMA for Acupuncture
•    PRISMA for Chinese Herbal Medicines
•    PRISMA for Complex Interventions
•    PRISMA-COSMIN for Outcome Measurement Instruments
•    PRISMA for Diagnostic Test Accuracy
•    PRISMA for EcoEvo
•    PRISMA Equity
•    PRISMA Harms
•    PRISMA Individual Participant Data
•    PRISMA for Living Systematic Reviews
•    PRISMA Moxibustion
•    PRISMA for Network Meta-Analyses
•    PRISMA for Protocols
•    PRISMA for Scoping Reviews
•    PRISMA Search
 
There are also reporting guidelines under development for systematic reviews, systematic review-related papers, and PRISMA extensions available on the EQUATOR Network website.

PRISMA Flow Diagram

The PRISMA Flow Diagram depicts the flow of information through the different phases of a systematic review. It maps out the number of records identified, included and excluded, and the reasons for exclusions. Different templates are available depending on the type of review (new or updated) and sources used to identify studies.

The MOOSE Statement

MOOSE (Meta-analysis of Observation Studies in Epidemiology)

The MOOSE group proposes a checklist with specifications for reporting meta-analyses that involve synthesizing data from observational studies such as cohort, case-control, and cross-sectional studies [3].

The AGREE Reporting Checklist

AGREE (Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation)

The AGREE Instrument evaluates the process of practice guideline development and the quality of reporting. AGREE II has become an internationally accepted standard for evaluation of the methodological quality of clinical practice guidelines [4]. Intended to improve the comprehensiveness, completeness, and transparency of reporting in practice guidelines [4], the AGREE Reporting Checklist is both valid and reliable and comprises 23 items organized into the original 6 quality domains.

Bibliography

  1. Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ. 2021 Mar 29;372:n71. doi: 10.1136/bmj.n71.
  2. Page MJ, Moher D, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al. PRISMA 2020 explanation and elaboration: updated guidance and exemplars for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ 2021;372:n160. doi: 10.1136/bmj.n160.
  3. Brooke BS, Schwartz TA. & Pawlik TM. (2021). MOOSE reporting guidelines for meta-analyses of observational studies. JAMA Surgery, 156(8), 787-788. doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2021.0522.
  4. Brouwers MC, Kerkvliet K, Spithoff K, on behalf of the AGREE Next Steps Consortium. The AGREE Reporting Checklist: a tool to improve reporting of clinical practice guidelines. BMJ. 2016;352:i1152. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.i1152. 
  5. Tricco AC, Lillie E, Zarin W, O'Brien KK, et al. PRISMA extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): checklist and explanation. Ann Intern Med. 2018 Oct 2;169(7):467-473. doi: 10.7326/M18-0850.