Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 Statement

Overview

Journal Syst Rev

Publisher Biomed Central

Date 2015 Jan 3

PMID 25554246

Citations 9028

Authors

David Moher

Larissa Shamseer

Mike Clarke

Davina Ghersi

Alessandro Liberati

Mark Petticrew

Paul Shekelle

Lesley A Stewart

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Systematic reviews should build on a protocol that describes the rationale, hypothesis, and planned methods of the review; few reviews report whether a protocol exists. Detailed, well-described protocols can facilitate the understanding and appraisal of the review methods, as well as the detection of modifications to methods and selective reporting in completed reviews. We describe the development of a reporting guideline, the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses for Protocols 2015 (PRISMA-P 2015). PRISMA-P consists of a 17-item checklist intended to facilitate the preparation and reporting of a robust protocol for the systematic review. Funders and those commissioning reviews might consider mandating the use of the checklist to facilitate the submission of relevant protocol information in funding applications. Similarly, peer reviewers and editors can use the guidance to gauge the completeness and transparency of a systematic review protocol submitted for publication in a journal or other medium.

Citing Articles

Athlete monitoring in handball (ATHMON HB): a systematic review protocol.

Henze A, Kirsten J, Matits L, Bizjak D, Schulz S Syst Rev. 2025; 14(1):64.

PMID: 40089750 DOI: 10.1186/s13643-025-02806-2.

Spectrum of genetic variants associated with maple syrup urine disease in the Middle East, North Africa, and Türkiye (MENAT): a systematic review.

Younes S, Elkahlout R, Kilani H, Okashah S, Sharshani H, Rezoug Z BMC Med Genomics. 2025; 18(1):49.

PMID: 40082840 PMC: 11905697. DOI: 10.1186/s12920-025-02083-x.

Demographic Factors Associated with Postoperative Complications in Primary Bariatric Surgery: A Rapid Review.

Hon J, Fahey P, Ariya M, Piya M, Craven A, Atlantis E Obes Surg. 2025; .

PMID: 40080280 DOI: 10.1007/s11695-025-07784-x.

Which specific modes of exercise training are most effective for breast related cancer fatigue? Network meta-analysis.

Li Y, Zhang J, Hu D, Gao L, Huang T Front Oncol. 2025; 15:1491634.

PMID: 40078193 PMC: 11897559. DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2025.1491634.

Leptin Levels and Bone Mineral Density: A Friend or a Foe for Bone Loss? A Systematic Review of the Association Between Leptin Levels and Low Bone Mineral Density.

Cosme D, Gomes A Int J Mol Sci. 2025; 26(5).

PMID: 40076690 PMC: 11901020. DOI: 10.3390/ijms26052066.

References

Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman D . Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. BMJ. 2009; 339:b2535. PMC: 2714657. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.b2535. View

Prady S, Richmond S, Morton V, MacPherson H . A systematic evaluation of the impact of STRICTA and CONSORT recommendations on quality of reporting for acupuncture trials. PLoS One. 2008; 3(2):e1577. PMC: 2216683. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0001577. View

Chan A, Tetzlaff J, Altman D, Laupacis A, Gotzsche P, Krleza-Jeric K . SPIRIT 2013 statement: defining standard protocol items for clinical trials. Ann Intern Med. 2013; 158(3):200-7. PMC: 5114123. DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-158-3-201302050-00583. View

Booth A, Clarke M, Ghersi D, Moher D, Petticrew M, Stewart L . An international registry of systematic-review protocols. Lancet. 2010; 377(9760):108-9. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(10)60903-8. View

Chan A, Hrobjartsson A, Haahr M, Gotzsche P, Altman D . Empirical evidence for selective reporting of outcomes in randomized trials: comparison of protocols to published articles. JAMA. 2004; 291(20):2457-65. DOI: 10.1001/jama.291.20.2457. View

Booth A, Clarke M, Dooley G, Ghersi D, Moher D, Petticrew M . The nuts and bolts of PROSPERO: an international prospective register of systematic reviews. Syst Rev. 2012; 1:2. PMC: 3348673. DOI: 10.1186/2046-4053-1-2. View

Moher D, Booth A, Stewart L . How to reduce unnecessary duplication: use PROSPERO. BJOG. 2014; 121(7):784-6. DOI: 10.1111/1471-0528.12657. View

Booth A, Clarke M, Ghersi D, Moher D, Petticrew M, Stewart L . Establishing a minimum dataset for prospective registration of systematic reviews: an international consultation. PLoS One. 2011; 6(11):e27319. PMC: 3217945. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0027319. View

Moher D, Tetzlaff J, Tricco A, Sampson M, Altman D . Epidemiology and reporting characteristics of systematic reviews. PLoS Med. 2007; 4(3):e78. PMC: 1831728. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.0040078. View

10.

Page M, McKenzie J, Kirkham J, Dwan K, Kramer S, Green S . Bias due to selective inclusion and reporting of outcomes and analyses in systematic reviews of randomised trials of healthcare interventions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014; (10):MR000035. PMC: 8191366. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.MR000035.pub2. View

11.

Moher D, Stewart L, Shekelle P . Establishing a new journal for systematic review products. Syst Rev. 2012; 1:1. PMC: 3348672. DOI: 10.1186/2046-4053-1-1. View

12.

Moher D, Schulz K, Simera I, Altman D . Guidance for developers of health research reporting guidelines. PLoS Med. 2010; 7(2):e1000217. PMC: 2821895. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000217. View

13.

Williams H . Cars, CONSORT 2010, and clinical practice. Trials. 2010; 11:33. PMC: 2857833. DOI: 10.1186/1745-6215-11-33. View

14.

Dwan K, Gamble C, Williamson P, Kirkham J . Systematic review of the empirical evidence of study publication bias and outcome reporting bias - an updated review. PLoS One. 2013; 8(7):e66844. PMC: 3702538. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0066844. View

15.

Liberati A, Altman D, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, Gotzsche P, Ioannidis J . The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. PLoS Med. 2009; 6(7):e1000100. PMC: 2707010. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000100. View

16.

Ma B, Guo J, Qi G, Li H, Peng J, Zhang Y . Epidemiology, quality and reporting characteristics of systematic reviews of traditional Chinese medicine interventions published in Chinese journals. PLoS One. 2011; 6(5):e20185. PMC: 3102106. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0020185. View

17.

Oxman A, Guyatt G . The science of reviewing research. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1993; 703:125-33; discussion 133-4. DOI: 10.1111/j.1749-6632.1993.tb26342.x. View

18.

Hopewell S, Altman D, Moher D, Schulz K . Endorsement of the CONSORT Statement by high impact factor medical journals: a survey of journal editors and journal 'Instructions to Authors'. Trials. 2008; 9:20. PMC: 2359733. DOI: 10.1186/1745-6215-9-20. View

19.

Straus S, Moher D . Registering systematic reviews. CMAJ. 2009; 182(1):13-4. PMC: 2802597. DOI: 10.1503/cmaj.081849. View

20.

Kirkham J, Dwan K, Altman D, Gamble C, Dodd S, Smyth R . The impact of outcome reporting bias in randomised controlled trials on a cohort of systematic reviews. BMJ. 2010; 340:c365. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.c365. View