Intended for healthcare professionals

  1. V体育平台登录 - Research
  2. PRISMA 2020...
  3. PRISMA 2020 explanation and elaboration: updated guidance and exemplars for reporting systematic reviews
CCBY Open access
Research Methods & Reporting

PRISMA 2020 explanation and elaboration: updated guidance and exemplars for reporting systematic reviews (VSports最新版本)

BMJ 2021; 372 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n160 (Published 29 March 2021) Cite this as: BMJ 2021;372:n160

Linked RMR

The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews
  1. Matthew J Page, senior research fellow1,
  2. David Moher, director and professor2,
  3. Patrick M Bossuyt, professor3,
  4. Isabelle Boutron, professor4,
  5. "V体育平台登录" Tammy C Hoffmann, professor5,
  6. Cynthia D Mulrow, professor6,
  7. Larissa Shamseer, doctoral student7,
  8. Jennifer M Tetzlaff, research product specialist8,
  9. Elie A Akl, professor9,
  10. Sue E Brennan, senior research fellow1,
  11. Roger Chou, professor10,
  12. Julie Glanville, associate director11,
  13. VSports注册入口 - Jeremy M Grimshaw, professor12,
  14. Asbjørn Hróbjartsson, professor13,
  15. V体育安卓版 - Manoj M Lalu, associate scientist and assistant professor14,
  16. Tianjing Li, associate professor15,
  17. Elizabeth W Loder, professor16,
  18. Evan Mayo-Wilson, associate professor17,
  19. Steve McDonald, senior research fellow1,
  20. Luke A McGuinness, research associate18,
  21. Lesley A Stewart, professor and director19,
  22. James Thomas (VSports手机版), professor20,
  23. Andrea C Tricco, scientist and associate professor21,
  24. Vivian A Welch, associate professor22,
  25. Penny Whiting (VSports手机版), associate professor18,
  26. Joanne E McKenzie, associate professor1
  1. 1School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
  2. 2Centre for Journalology, Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada; School of Epidemiology and Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada
  3. 3Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Amsterdam University Medical Centres, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
  4. 4Université de Paris, Centre of Epidemiology and Statistics (CRESS), Inserm, F 75004 Paris, France
  5. 5Institute for Evidence-Based Healthcare, Faculty of Health Sciences and Medicine, Bond University, Gold Coast, Australia
  6. 6University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, Texas, United States; Annals of Internal Medicine
  7. 7Knowledge Translation Program, Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, Toronto, Canada; School of Epidemiology and Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada
  8. 8Evidence Partners, Ottawa, Canada
  9. 9Clinical Research Institute, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon; Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
  10. 10Department of Medical Informatics and Clinical Epidemiology, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon, United States
  11. 11York Health Economics Consortium (YHEC Ltd), University of York, York, UK
  12. 12Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada; School of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada; Department of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada
  13. 13Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine Odense, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark; Department of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark; Open Patient data Explorative Network, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark
  14. 14Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, The Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, Canada; Clinical Epidemiology Program, Blueprint Translational Research Group, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada; Regenerative Medicine Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada
  15. 15Department of Ophthalmology, School of Medicine, University of Colorado Denver, Denver, Colorado, United States; Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, United States
  16. 16Division of Headache, Department of Neurology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, United States; Head of Research, The BMJ, London, UK
  17. 17Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Indiana University School of Public Health-Bloomington, Bloomington, Indiana, United States
  18. 18Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
  19. 19Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, York, UK
  20. 20EPPI-Centre, UCL Social Research Institute, University College London, London, UK
  21. 21Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute of St. Michael's Hospital, Unity Health Toronto, Toronto, Canada; Epidemiology Division of the Dalla Lana School of Public Health and the Institute of Health Management, Policy, and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; Queen's Collaboration for Health Care Quality Joanna Briggs Institute Centre of Excellence, Queen's University, Kingston, Canada
  22. 22Methods Centre, Bruyère Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada; School of Epidemiology and Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada
  1. Correspondence to: M Page matthew.page{at}monash.edu
  • Accepted 4 January 2021

The methods and results of systematic reviews should be reported in sufficient detail to allow users to assess the trustworthiness and applicability of the review findings VSports app下载. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement was developed to facilitate transparent and complete reporting of systematic reviews and has been updated (to PRISMA 2020) to reflect recent advances in systematic review methodology and terminology. Here, we present the explanation and elaboration paper for PRISMA 2020, where we explain why reporting of each item is recommended, present bullet points that detail the reporting recommendations, and present examples from published reviews. We hope that changes to the content and structure of PRISMA 2020 will facilitate uptake of the guideline and lead to more transparent, complete, and accurate reporting of systematic reviews.

Systematic reviews are essential for healthcare providers, policy makers, and other decision makers, who would otherwise be confronted by an overwhelming volume of research on which to base their decisions. To allow decision makers to assess the trustworthiness and applicability of review findings, reports of systematic reviews should be transparent and complete. Furthermore, such reporting should allow others to replicate or update reviews. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement published in 2009 (hereafter referred to as PRISMA 2009)123456789101112 was designed to help authors prepare transparent accounts of their reviews, and its recommendations have been widely endorsed and adopted. 13 We have updated the PRISMA 2009 statement (to PRISMA 2020) to ensure currency and relevance and to reflect advances in systematic review methodology and terminology V体育官网.

Summary points (V体育安卓版)

  • The PRISMA 2020 statement includes a checklist of 27 items to guide reporting of systematic reviews

  • In this article we explain why reporting of each item is recommended, present …

View Full Text
Back to top