Did you know that only 17% of systematic reviews fully comply with the PRISMA 2020 checklist requirements? That’s a staggering statistic that reveals the widespread gaps in checklist compliance among researchers. With the increasing focus on transparency and reproducibility in scientific research, it’s essential to ensure that your systematic review meets the highest standards of integrity. By completing the PRISMA 2020 checklist accurately, you can enhance the credibility of your research and contribute to the advancement of knowledge in your field.

Background: [Context and rationale]
Objectives: [Primary and secondary aims]
Methods: [Key methodological elements]
Results: [Main findings]
Conclusions: [Key conclusions]
Registration: [PROSPERO number]
      

In this article, we will guide you through the process of completing the PRISMA 2020 checklist for your systematic review. We will provide tips and an example to help you navigate the checklist requirements effectively. Let’s dive in and discover how you can ensure checklist compliance and achieve transparency in your research.

Key Takeaways:

• Only 17% of systematic reviews fully comply with the PRISMA 2020 checklist.
• Completing the checklist accurately enhances the credibility of your research.
• The PRISMA 2020 checklist promotes transparency and reproducibility in systematic reviews.
• This article provides tips and an example for completing the checklist effectively.
• Ensure checklist compliance to contribute to the advancement of knowledge in your field.

Understanding the PRISMA 2020 Checklist and Its Importance

To conduct a reliable and transparent systematic review, researchers need to adhere to a standardized set of guidelines. The PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) 2020 checklist is a vital tool that ensures the completeness and transparency of systematic review reporting. Understanding the PRISMA 2020 checklist and its importance is crucial for researchers striving to produce high-quality and reproducible research.

What is the PRISMA 2020 Checklist?

The PRISMA 2020 checklist is a comprehensive set of items that researchers must consider and report on when conducting a systematic review. It serves as a guide, outlining essential elements necessary for transparent reporting. By following the checklist, researchers can ensure that their systematic reviews are conducted in a clear, consistent, and reproducible manner.

Modifications from PRISMA 2009 to PRISMA 2020

The PRISMA 2020 checklist builds upon the previous version, PRISMA 2009, and incorporates updated guidelines and recommendations. The modifications aim to enhance transparency and improve the reporting quality of systematic reviews. Researchers should familiarize themselves with the changes to ensure compliance with the latest standards and best practices.

Why Transparency in Systematic Reviews is Crucial

Transparency is a cornerstone of research integrity, and it plays a vital role in promoting trust and reproducibility. In the context of systematic reviews, transparency allows readers to assess the reliability and validity of the study findings. By following the PRISMA 2020 checklist, researchers can provide a detailed account of their methods, reducing the risk of biases and enhancing the reproducibility of their work.

By adhering to the PRISMA 2020 checklist, researchers can demonstrate their commitment to transparency, thereby contributing to the rigor and reliability of the scientific literature.

Starting with the Basics: Title and Abstract Guidelines

In the PRISMA 2020 checklist, proper title and abstract guidelines play a crucial role in effectively communicating the essence of a systematic review. Crafting a clear and concise title is essential, as it serves as the first impression of the review and should accurately represent its content. A well-written title should capture the attention of readers and entice them to explore further.

Similarly, the abstract serves as a concise summary of the review and should provide a comprehensive overview to readers. It should highlight the objective, methodology, main findings, and conclusion of the review, allowing readers to quickly assess its relevance and importance. A well-structured abstract helps researchers determine if the review aligns with their interests and research needs.

When writing the title and abstract, researchers should consider the following guidelines:

1. Clarity: Ensure that the title and abstract are clear and concise, avoiding jargon or technical terms that may hinder understanding.
2. Completeness: Include all essential elements in the abstract, such as the research question, study design, data sources, and main findings.
3. Relevance: Highlight the importance and significance of the research topic in the title and abstract to attract attention and engage readers.
4. Accuracy: Provide a faithful representation of the systematic review’s purpose, methods, and outcomes in the title and abstract.

By adhering to these guidelines, researchers can ensure that the title and abstract effectively convey the main aspects of their systematic review, facilitating its discoverability and providing a comprehensive overview for interested readers.

The Intricacies of the PRISMA Flowchart: A Step-by-Step Guide

In order to effectively utilize the PRISMA 2020 checklist for systematic reviews, researchers must understand the intricacies of the PRISMA flowchart. This step-by-step guide will provide a comprehensive overview of how to navigate the flowchart and ensure compliance with the checklist.

The PRISMA flowchart serves as a visual representation of the study selection process in a systematic review. Its purpose is to enhance transparency and facilitate the understanding of the review methodology. By following the flowchart, researchers can document each step of the study selection process, ensuring clarity and reproducibility.

Let’s now dive into the step-by-step guide:

1. Start by clearly defining the initial number of identified records. This includes all records identified from the initial search, before any exclusions.
2. Proceed to the screening stage, where you will outline the number of records screened based on title and abstract. It is important to document the reasons for excluding any records at this stage.
3. Move on to the eligibility assessment, where you will assess the full-text articles for their suitability. Again, document the reasons for excluding any articles at this stage.
4. In the final stage, you will document the number of studies included in the systematic review. This includes studies that meet all the eligibility criteria.

By following these steps and accurately filling out the PRISMA flowchart, researchers can ensure transparency and reproducibility in their systematic review. It is important to carefully review and cross-check the flowchart to avoid any errors or omissions, as these can impact the validity of the review findings.

“The PRISMA flowchart is a powerful tool for researchers to visually represent the study selection process in a systematic review. By diligently following each step and accurately documenting the number of records identified, screened, and included, researchers can enhance the transparency and reliability of their work.”

As researchers progress through the review process, the PRISMA flowchart serves as a guiding framework, keeping them on track and ensuring compliance with the PRISMA 2020 checklist. Below is an image of the PRISMA flowchart for reference:

With this step-by-step guide and the PRISMA flowchart, researchers can navigate the intricacies of the study selection process in systematic reviews, promoting transparency and contributing to high-quality research.

Methodology Section Breakdown: Ensuring a Standardized Approach

In a systematic review, the methodology section plays a crucial role in ensuring a standardized approach to the research process. This section provides detailed guidance on key components that researchers need to consider when conducting their review. By following these guidelines, researchers can enhance the transparency, validity, and reproducibility of their systematic reviews.

Eligibility Criteria: What Studies to Include?

Defining eligibility criteria is an essential step in conducting a systematic review. These criteria determine which studies will be included in the review and which will be excluded. Researchers should clearly outline the characteristics that studies must meet to be considered eligible. This helps ensure that the review focuses on relevant and reliable evidence.

When defining eligibility criteria, researchers should consider factors such as study design, population, intervention or exposure, comparators, and outcomes of interest. By specifying these criteria, researchers can narrow down the pool of studies to those that provide the most relevant information and align with the research question.

Compiling Information Sources and Searches

A systematic review requires comprehensive and systematic searches of various information sources. Researchers should compile a list of relevant databases, such as PubMed, Embase, and Scopus, to identify eligible studies. Additionally, researchers should consider searching for gray literature, conference proceedings, and reference lists of relevant articles to minimize potential publication bias.

During the search process, researchers should use standardized search terms and Boolean operators to ensure consistency and thoroughness. It is crucial to document the search strategy in detail, including the search terms, databases searched, and any filters or limits applied. This transparency helps ensure the reproducibility of the review and enables other researchers to replicate the search process.

Data Collection and Itemization Processes

Data collection plays a vital role in a systematic review, as it involves extracting relevant information from the included studies. Researchers should develop a data extraction form that includes key variables or items of interest. These variables can include study characteristics, participant demographics, intervention details, outcomes, and measures of effect.

When extracting data, researchers should ensure accuracy, consistency, and transparency. This involves carefully reviewing each included study and extracting the necessary information in a standardized manner. Researchers should also consider data verification processes, such as having a second reviewer independently extract a subset of articles for comparison.

After the data extraction process, researchers should compile the extracted data into a structured format, such as a table or spreadsheet. This allows for easy analysis and comparison of findings across studies. The structured format should be well-organized, with clear headings and appropriate categorization of data.

By following these guidelines for eligibility criteria, information sources, and data collection, researchers can ensure a standardized and transparent approach in their methodology section. This allows for the accurate and reliable synthesis of evidence in systematic reviews.

How to Fill the PRISMA 2020 Checklist: Tips and Example

In order to ensure compliance with the PRISMA 2020 checklist for systematic reviews, it is essential to accurately fill out the checklist. Here are some practical tips to help researchers complete the checklist with precision and adherence to the checklist requirements:

Tips for Completing the PRISMA 2020 Checklist Accurately

1. Read through the PRISMA 2020 checklist and familiarize yourself with all the items and sub-items.
2. Start by organizing your systematic review documentation and materials so that you have everything readily available.
3. Follow a systematic approach when going through each item on the checklist. Take your time, ensuring that each item is clearly addressed and supported with accurate information.
4. Consult the PRISMA 2020 explanatory document for additional guidance on specific checklist items.
5. Ensure that you provide clear descriptions and explanations for each item, avoiding vagueness or ambiguity.
6. Double-check your completed checklist for accuracy and completeness before finalizing it.

Example of a Filled PRISMA 2020 Checklist

Leveraging Tools and Software for Filling the PRISMA Checklist

There are several tools and software available that can streamline the process of filling out the PRISMA checklist. These resources can help researchers efficiently complete the checklist and ensure its accuracy. Some popular options include:

• PRISMA-ScR: This web-based tool provides a user-friendly interface for completing the PRISMA checklist and generating a completed checklist document.
• Covidence: A systematic review software that simplifies the review process and facilitates checklist compliance through features such as automated screening and data extraction.
• Rayyan: A free web application that supports collaboration, screening, and data extraction, integrating seamlessly with the PRISMA checklist.

By leveraging these tools and software, researchers can enhance the efficiency and accuracy of their checklist completion process.

Analyzing the Results Section of Your Systematic Review

After meticulously completing the PRISMA 2020 checklist and conducting a thorough data analysis, it’s time to delve into the results section of your systematic review. This section plays a crucial role in presenting your findings and providing meaningful insights to the readers.

In the results section, you will showcase the outcomes of your data analysis and highlight the key findings derived from the systematic review process. It is essential to organize your results in a clear and structured manner to ensure they are easily understandable and interpretable.

When analyzing the results, consider the following components:

1. Data Analysis: Summarize the statistical methods used to analyze the collected data, highlighting any specific techniques that were employed in your study.
2. Key Findings: Present the main outcomes of your systematic review, emphasizing the most significant and relevant findings. Provide concise and precise information to support your conclusions.
3. Effect Sizes: If applicable, include effect sizes to quantify the magnitude of the observed results. This provides additional context and helps readers understand the practical significance of your findings.
4. Tables and Figures: Utilize tables, graphs, and other visual aids to represent data in a concise and visually appealing manner. These visual elements enhance the clarity and accessibility of your results.

Remember, when analyzing the results section, it is crucial to remain objective and unbiased. Interpret the data objectively, avoiding any personal biases or preconceived notions. Let the data speak for itself and draw conclusions based on the evidence presented.

By thoroughly analyzing the results section and aligning it with the PRISMA 2020 checklist, you ensure that your systematic review is transparent, reliable, and valuable to the scientific community. The systematic and meticulous approach employed throughout the review process, from adhering to the checklist guidelines to conducting robust data analysis, contributes to the credibility and trustworthiness of your findings.

PRISMA 2020 Checklist

From:  Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ 2021;372:n71. doi: 10.1136/bmj.n71

For more information, visit: http://www.prisma-statement.org/

With the PRISMA 2020 checklist as your guide, you can confidently present your results and contribute to the body of knowledge in your field. Analyzing the results section is an essential step in conveying the outcomes of your systematic review effectively.

Interpretation and Discussion: Conveying Your Findings Effectively

Once you have completed the data analysis and presented your results, it’s time to delve into the interpretation and discussion section of your systematic review. This section plays a critical role in conveying the significance of your findings to your audience. It allows you to explore the implications of your research and provide valuable insights for future studies.

When crafting your interpretation and discussion, consider the following key elements:

1. Contextualize your findings: Start by providing a brief overview of the main findings and their relevance to the research question or objective of your systematic review. This helps your readers understand the significance of your results within a larger context.
2. Discuss the implications: Analyze and interpret your findings in depth, discussing their implications for theory, practice, or policy. Consider both the strengths and limitations of your study and how they may impact the validity and generalizability of your results.
3. Compare with existing literature: Explore how your findings align with or differ from previous studies in the field. Identify any emerging patterns or conflicting evidence and discuss potential explanations for these discrepancies.
4. Address unanswered questions: Highlight any unanswered research questions or areas for further investigation that your study has identified. This contributes to the ongoing development of knowledge in your field and helps guide future research directions.
5. Convey the significance: Be clear and concise in conveying the overall significance of your findings. Explain how they contribute to the existing body of knowledge, fill gaps in the literature, or offer new insights that can inform future research, policies, or interventions.

“The interpretation and discussion section provides researchers with the opportunity to showcase their analytical skills and present their findings in a comprehensive and thought-provoking manner.”

By effectively conveying your findings in the interpretation and discussion section, you enhance the impact of your systematic review and facilitate knowledge dissemination within your scientific community. Remember to balance objectivity with critical analysis, supporting your claims with evidence from your study and relevant literature.

Emphasize the practical implications of your findings and how they can inform decision-making processes or practice in your field. By doing so, you position yourself as a credible and influential contributor to the body of knowledge in your area of research.

Remember, the interpretation and discussion section is an essential component of your systematic review and should be approached with careful consideration. Use the PRISMA 2020 checklist as a guide to ensure that you cover all the necessary elements and present your findings in a clear and compelling manner.

Best Practices for PRISMA 2020 Checklist Compliance

In order to ensure accurate and effective completion of the PRISMA 2020 checklist for systematic reviews, it is important to follow best practices for checklist compliance. By avoiding common pitfalls, adhering to preregistration and protocol guidelines, and addressing conflicts of interest, researchers can enhance the credibility and transparency of their reviews.

Common Pitfalls to Avoid When Using the PRISMA 2020 Checklist

While completing the PRISMA 2020 checklist, researchers should be mindful of potential pitfalls that could compromise the integrity of their systematic reviews. Some common pitfalls to avoid include:

• Failing to clearly define inclusion and exclusion criteria
• Overlooking relevant studies during the search process
• Inconsistent data collection and itemization
• Lack of transparency in reporting study selection process

By being aware of these pitfalls and taking proactive measures to address them, researchers can improve the quality and reliability of their systematic reviews.

The Role of Preregistration and Protocol in PRISMA Compliance

Preregistration and protocol play a crucial role in ensuring PRISMA compliance. By preregistering their systematic review protocols, researchers can enhance transparency and reduce the risk of selective reporting. This involves registering the study design, inclusion/exclusion criteria, and analysis plan before conducting the review. Following a predefined protocol helps maintain consistency in the review process and reduces potential biases.

Acknowledging Support and Managing Conflicts of Interest

It is essential for researchers to acknowledge any support received during the systematic review process. This includes funding, grants, or any other form of assistance that may have influenced the review’s outcome. By disclosing potential conflicts of interest, researchers maintain transparency and ensure the credibility of their findings. Properly managing conflicts of interest helps maintain the integrity and impartiality of the review process.

By following these best practices, researchers can enhance their compliance with the PRISMA 2020 checklist and contribute to the overall quality and transparency of systematic reviews. Adhering to checklist guidelines, avoiding common pitfalls, and addressing conflicts of interest are vital steps in conducting reliable and comprehensive reviews.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the PRISMA 2020 checklist plays a vital role in ensuring transparency and reliability in systematic reviews. By completing the checklist accurately, researchers can enhance the credibility of their work and contribute to the advancement of scientific knowledge.

Throughout this article, we have explored the importance of checklist compliance and provided valuable insights and tips for effectively using the PRISMA 2020 checklist. We have discussed the significance of transparency in systematic reviews and how the checklist aids in achieving this goal.

As researchers, it is crucial to prioritize checklist compliance in our future work. By following the guidelines outlined in the PRISMA 2020 checklist, we can ensure that our systematic reviews are conducted in a standardized and transparent manner. This will not only strengthen the validity of our findings but also contribute to the overall trustworthiness of the scientific community.

So, let’s commit to completing the PRISMA 2020 checklist diligently and embracing its principles of transparency and reliability. By doing so, we can elevate the quality of systematic reviews, drive impactful research, and inspire confidence in our findings. Happy checklist completion!

Source Links

• https://guides.lib.unc.edu/prisma
• https://www.distillersr.com/resources/systematic-literature-reviews/prisma-2020-checklist-example
• https://www.bmj.com/content/372/bmj.n160