Article type
Year
Abstract
Background: The PRISMA statement (preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses) was developed to provide the reporting guidelines for reviewers of systematic reviews (SR) or meta-analyses (MA), to improve clarity and transparency of SRs. On the other hand, Meta-analyses are commonly updated when new trials appeared, or authors of Cochrane Reviews are suggested to update the reviews every second year. However, it might be a question whether it should be fully qualified to report an updated MA/SR.
Objectives: To evaluate a published updated MA using the PRISMA statement and put forward the questions.
Methods: An updated MA was included (The Lancet Oncol 2011; 12: 681–692), 27 items of the PRISMA statement were concerned by using ‘point-to-point’ method to evaluate its clarity and transparency. A table, included the 27 items, was showed to put forward the questions.
Results: The evaluated results and our concerns were showed in Table 1.
Conclusions: The PRISMA statement might be not fully qualified when it was used to guide the reporting of an updated MA/SR.
Objectives: To evaluate a published updated MA using the PRISMA statement and put forward the questions.
Methods: An updated MA was included (The Lancet Oncol 2011; 12: 681–692), 27 items of the PRISMA statement were concerned by using ‘point-to-point’ method to evaluate its clarity and transparency. A table, included the 27 items, was showed to put forward the questions.
Results: The evaluated results and our concerns were showed in Table 1.
Conclusions: The PRISMA statement might be not fully qualified when it was used to guide the reporting of an updated MA/SR.
PDF