Skip to main content

Languages

Should the PRISMA statement be fully qualified to report an updated meta-analysis? A case report

Date and Location

Session: 

P2.077

Date

Saturday 21 September 2013 - 10:30 - 12:00

Location

Presenting author and contact person

Presenting author

Xiran HE

Contact person

Ping-Ping Li
Abstract text
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: 681-92), 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.
Attachments

Attachments