Pulse Brain · Growing Health Evidence Index
Peer-reviewed

The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews

Matthew J. Page, Joanne E. McKenzie, Patrick M. Bossuyt, Isabelle Boutron, Tammy Hoffmann, cindy mulrow, Larissa Shamseer, Jennifer Tetzlaff, Elie A. Akl, Sue Brennan, Roger Chou, Julie Glanville, Jeremy Grimshaw, Asbjørn Hróbjartsson, Manoj M. Lalu, Tianjing Li, Elizabeth Loder, Evan Mayo‐Wilson, Steve McDonald, Luke A. McGuinness, Lesley Stewart, James Thomas, Andrea C. Tricco, Vivian Welch, Penny Whiting, David Moher

2020

Read source ↗ All evidence

Summary

Background: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Statement, published in 2009, was designed to help systematic reviewers transparently report why the review was done, what the authors did and what they found. Over the last decade, there have been many advances in systematic review methodology and terminology, which have necessitated an update to the guideline.Objectives: To develop the PRISMA 2020 statement for reporting systematic reviews.Methods: We reviewed 60 documents with reporting guidance for systematic reviews to generate suggested modifications to the PRISMA 2009 statement. We sought feedback on the suggested modifications through an online survey of 110 systematic review methodologists and journal editors. The results of the review and

Source type
Peer-reviewed study
DOI
10.31222/osf.io/v7gm2
Catalogue ID
SNmois812n-4soptc
Pulse AI · ask about this record

Dig deeper with Pulse AI.

Pulse AI has read the whole catalogue. Ask about this record, its theme, or how the findings apply to UK farming and policy — every answer cites the underlying studies.