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

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

doi:10.1136/bmj.n71

Cited by 41,517 publications

(25,754 citation statements)

References 72 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

19,946

Contrasting

Unclassified

503

Order By: Relevance

“…Separate guidance for items that should be described in protocols of systematic reviews is available (PRISMA-P 2015 statement). 21 22 PRISMA 2020 explanation and elaboration PRISMA 2020 is published as a suite of three papers: a statement paper (consisting of the 27-item checklist, an expanded checklist that details reporting recommendations for each item, the PRISMA 2020 abstract checklist, and the revised flow diagram 23 ); a development paper (which outlines the steps taken to update the PRISMA 2009 statement and provides rationale for modifications to the original items 24 ); and this paper, the updated explanation and elaboration for PRISMA 2020. In this paper, for each item, we explain why reporting of the item is recommended and present bullet points that detail the reporting recommendations.…”

Section: Scope Of This Guidelinementioning

confidence: 99%

“…This structure is new to PRISMA 2020 and has been adopted to facilitate implementation of the guidance 2526. Authors familiar with PRISMA 2020 may opt to use the standalone statement paper23; however, for those who are new to or unfamiliar with PRISMA 2020, we encourage use of this explanation and elaboration document. Box 1 includes a glossary of terms used throughout the PRISMA 2020 explanation and elaboration paper.…”

Section: Prisma 2020 Explanation and Elaborationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

PRISMA 2020 explanation and elaboration: updated guidance and exemplars for reporting systematic reviews

Page

Moher

Bossuyt

et al. 2021

BMJ

Self Cite

5,311

2,786

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The PRISMA 2020 statement includes a checklist of 27 items to guide reporting of systematic reviews In this article we explain why reporting of each item is recommended, present bullet points that detail the reporting recommendations, and present examples from published reviews We hope that uptake of the PRISMA 2020 statement will lead to more transparent, complete, and accurate reporting of systematic reviews, thus facilitating evidence based decision making on 15 April 2021 by guest. Protected by copyright.

show abstract

Section: Scope Of This Guidelinementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Prisma 2020 Explanation and Elaborationmentioning

confidence: 99%

PRISMA 2020 explanation and elaboration: updated guidance and exemplars for reporting systematic reviews

Page

Moher

Bossuyt

et al. 2021

BMJ

Self Cite

5,311

2,786

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This structure is new to PRISMA 2020 and has been adopted to facilitate implementation of the guidance. 25 26 Authors familiar with PRISMA 2020 may opt to use the standalone statement paper 23 ; however, for those who are new to or unfamiliar with PRISMA 2020, we encourage use of this explanation and elaboration document. Box 1 includes a glossary of terms used throughout the PRISMA 2020 explanation and elaboration paper.…”

Section: Scope Of This Guidelinementioning

confidence: 99%

PRISMA 2020 explanation and elaboration: updated guidance and exemplars for reporting systematic reviews

Page¹,

Moher²,

Bossuyt³

et al. 2020

Preprint

Self Cite

570

609

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The methods and results of systematic reviews should be reported in sufficient detail to allow users to assess the trustworthiness and applicability of the review findings. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement was developed to facilitate transparent and complete reporting of systematic reviews and has been updated (to PRISMA 2020) to reflect recent advances in systematic review methodology and terminology. Here, we present the explanation and elaboration paper for PRISMA 2020, where we explain why reporting of each item is recommended, present bullet points that detail the reporting recommendations, and present exemplars from published reviews. We hope that changes to the content and structure of PRISMA 2020 will facilitate uptake of the guideline and lead to more transparent, complete and accurate reporting of systematic reviews.

show abstract

“…A systematic search of three databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science) was conducted to identify relevant papers, according to published guidelines (Mikolajewicz & Komarova, 2019;Moher et al, 2009;Page et al, 2021). Since this was the first attempt to systematically gather such evidence, the search was conducted without chronological limitations and applied within all fields of the databases.…”

Section: Study Selectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sensory Recruitment in Visual Short-Term Memory: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Sensory Visual Cortex Interference Using Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation

Phylactou¹,

Traikapi²,

Παπαδάτου-Παστού³

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Visual short-term memory (VSTM) links perception with higher cognitive processes by maintaining visual information that is absent from the environment. Yet, it remains unclear if sensory visual cortex is a necessary component of the brain network that underlies short-term maintenance of visual information. Previous reviews remain inconclusive and open to interpretation. Here, we aimed to systematically identify and review studies that have investigated the role of the sensory visual cortex in VSTM using transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), a method that allows exploration of causal relationships, and to quantitatively explore the effect of TMS interference on the sensory visual cortex during VSTM using meta-analytic methodology. Thirteen studies were identified and qualitatively reviewed. Out of those, seven studies provided sufficient statistical data for meta-analysis and yielded a total of 30 effect sizes, which were included in the meta-analyses. Two meta-analyses were conducted, one regarding the encoding phase of VSTM (19 effect sizes), and one regarding the maintenance phase of VSTM (11 effect sizes). The results from the systematic review and the two meta-analyses indicate that the sensory visual cortex is likely involved in both the encoding and maintenance phase of VSTM. In some cases, evidence did not show significant effects of TMS, however, this is suggested to be due to low memory load or low perceptual task demands. Overall, these findings support the idea that sensory visual areas are part of the brain network responsible for successfully maintaining information in short-term memory when no physical stimulus is present in the environment.

show abstract

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

Cited by 41,517 publications

References 72 publications

PRISMA 2020 explanation and elaboration: updated guidance and exemplars for reporting systematic reviews

PRISMA 2020 explanation and elaboration: updated guidance and exemplars for reporting systematic reviews

PRISMA 2020 explanation and elaboration: updated guidance and exemplars for reporting systematic reviews

Sensory Recruitment in Visual Short-Term Memory: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Sensory Visual Cortex Interference Using Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About