Protocol Guidance
A systematic review protocol describes the rationale, hypothesis, and planned methods of the review. It should be prepared before a review is started and used as a guide to carry out the review.
Standards
PRISMA-P was published in 2015 to facilitate the development and reporting of systematic review protocols.
Moher D, Shamseer L, Clarke M, Ghersi D, Liberati A, Petticrew M, Shekelle P, Stewart LA. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Syst Rev. 2015;4(1):1. doi: 10.1186/2046-4053-4-1
Lasserson T, Thomas J, Higgins J. Starting a review. In: Higgins J, Thomas J, Chandler J, et al., eds. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. version 6.2 : Cochrane; 2021.
- Standard 2.6, Recommended Standards for Developing the Systematic Review Protocol
|
2.6.1 |
Describe the context and rationale for the review from both a decision-making and research perspective |
|
2.6.2 |
Describe the study screening and selection criteria (inclusion/exclusion criteria) |
|
2.6.3 |
Describe precisely which outcome measures, time points, interventions, and comparison groups will be addressed |
|
2.6.4 |
Describe the search strategy for identifying relevant evidence |
|
2.6.5 |
Describe the procedures for study selection |
|
2.6.6 |
Describe the data extraction strategy |
|
2.6.7 |
Describe the process for identifying and resolving disagreement between researchers in study selection and data extraction decisions |
|
2.6.8 |
Describe the approach to critically appraising individual studies |
|
2.6.9 |
Describe the method for evaluating the body of evidence, including the quantitative and qualitative synthesis strategy |
|
2.6.10 |
Describe and justify any planned analyses of differential treatment effects according to patient subgroups, how an intervention is delivered, or how an outcome is measured |
|
2.6.11 |
Describe the proposed timetable for conducting the review |
Eden J, Levit L, Berg A. Finding What Works in Health Care : Standards for Systematic Reviews. National Academies Press; 2011. Accessed May 5, 2021. http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=13059
Addressing Studies in Potentially Predatory Publications in Your Protocol
*Preliminary guidance from the Joanna Briggs Insitute (JBI) and elsewhere encourages describing processes to evaluate the source of published research for questionable open access (OA) journals in your protocol for increased transparency. Checking for inclusion in DOAJ.org might be one method to assess status of OA titles. To learn more, view this JBI Webinar or see the article below:
Munn, Zachary1; Barker, Timothy1; Stern, Cindy1; Pollock, Danielle1; Ross-White, Amanda2; Klugar, Miloslav3; Wiechula, Rick4; Aromataris, Edoardo1; Shamseer, Larissa5. Should I include studies from “predatory” journals in a systematic review? Interim guidance for systematic reviewers. JBI Evidence Synthesis 19(8):1915-1923, August 2021. | DOI: 10.11124/JBIES-21-00138