Skip to Main Content

Systematic Reviews: PRISMA Reporting Items

Follow the PRISMA guidelines to make sure you are including all relevant information in your paper. 

All images on this page are courtesy of Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., et al. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 372, n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71

Links to PRISMA Guidelines & Extensions

There are also several PRISMA extensions for different types or aspects of systematic reviews:

Introductory Items

1. Title (Identify the report as a systematic review). 2. Abstract (See the PRISMA 2020 for Abstracts checklist). 3. Rationale (Describe the rationale for the review in the context of existing knowledge). 4. Objectives (Provide an explicit statement of the objectives or questions the review addresses)

Abstract Items

PRISMA 2020 for Abstracts checklist. 1. Title (identify the report as a systematic review). 2. Objectives (Provide an explicit statement of the main objectives or questions the review addresses.) 3. Eligibility criteria (specify the inclusion and exclusion criteria). 4. Information sources (specify the information sources used to identify studies and the date when each was last searched). 5. Risk of bias (specify the methods used to assess risk of bias in included studies). 6. Synthesis of results (specify the methods used to present and synthesize results). 7. Included studies (give the total number of included studies and summarize relevant characteristics). 8. Synthesis of results (present results for main outcomes, indicating the number of included studies and participants for each. If meta-analysis was done, report the summary estimate and confidence interval. If comparing groups, indicate the direction of effect). 9. Limitations of evidence (Provide a brief summary of limitations of evidence included in the review, e.g. risk of bias, inconsistency, imprecision). 10. Interpretation (Provide a general interpretation of results and important implications). 11. Funding (specify the primary source of funding for the review). 12. Registration (provide the register name and registration number).

Methods

5. Eligibility criteria (specify the inclusion and exclusion criteria and how studies were grouped for the syntheses). 6. information sources (specify all databases, registers, websites, reference lists, and other sources searched to identify studies, specify the date when each source was last searched). 7. search strategy (present the full search strategies, including any filters and limits used). 8. selection process (specify the methods used to decide whether a study met the inclusion criteria of the review, including how many reviewers screened each record, and details of automation tools used). 9. data collection process (specify the methods used to collect data from reports, including how many reviewers collected data, any processes for obtaining or confirming data from study investigators, and details of automation tools used). 10. data items (List and define all outcomes for which data were sought. Specify whether all results that were compatible with each outcome domain in each study were sought or the methods used to decide which results to collect. List and define all other variables for which data were sought). 11. study risk of bias assessment (Specify the methods used to assess risk of bias in included studies, including tools used and how many reviewers assessed each study). 12. effect measures (Specify for each outcome the effect measures used in the synthesis or presentation of results). 13. synthesis methods (Describe the processes used to decide which studies were eligible for each synthesis. Describe any methods required to prepare the data, tabulate or display results. Describe any methods used to synthesize results and provide a rationale. If meta-analysis was performed, describe the model, method, and software package used. Describe any methods to explore possible causes of heterogeneity and any sensitivity analyses conducted.) 14. reporting bias assessment (Describe any methods used to assess risk of bias due to missing results in a synthesis). 15.certainty assessment (Describe any methods used to assess certainty or confidence in the body of evidence for an outcome).

Results and Discussion

16. Study Selection (Describe the results of the search and selection process, ideally using a flow diagram. Cite studies that might appear to meet the inclusion criteria but were excluded, and explain why). 17. Study characteristics (Cite each included study and present its characteristics). 18. risk of bias in studies (Present assessments of risk of bias for each included study). 19. results of individual studies (For all outcomes, present for each study: summary statistics and an effect estimate and its precision, ideally using tables or plots). 20. results of syntheses (For each synthesis, briefly summarize the characteristics and risk of bias among contributing studies. Present results of all statistical syntheses conducted. If meta-analysis was done, present the summary estimate and its precision, and measures of statistical heterogeneity. If comparing groups, describe the direction of the effect. Present results of all investigations of possible causes of heterogeneity among study results. Present results of all sensitivity analyses conducted to assess robustness of synthesized results). 21. reporting biases (Present assessments of risk of bias due to missing results). 22. certainty of evidence (Present assessments of certainty or confidence in the body of evidence for each outcome assessed). 23. discussion (Provide a general interpretation of the results. Discusses any limitations of evidence included and of review processes used. Discuss implications for practice, policy, and future research).

Other Information

24. Registration and protocol (Provide register name and registration number, or state that the review was not registered. Indicate where review protocol can be accessed, or state that a protocol was not prepared. Explain any amendments to information provided at registration or in protocol). 25. support (Describe sources of financial or non-financial support for the review and the role of funders or sponsors in the review). 26. competing interests (Declare any competing interests of review authors). 27. availability of data, code, and other materials (Report which of the following are publicly available and where they can be found: template data collection forms, data extracted from included studies, data used for analyses, analytic code, any other materials used).