SynthesisPloS one2013
Testing the PRISMA-Equity 2012 reporting guideline: the perspectives of systematic review authors.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
21 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- The health-related quality of life, mental health and mental illnesses of patients with inclusion body myositis (IBM): results of a mixed methods systematic review.Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2022Pooled it
- What Works? Prevention and Control of Sexually Transmitted Infections and Blood-Borne Viruses in Migrants from Sub-Saharan Africa, Northeast Asia and Southeast Asia Living in High-Income Countries: A Systematic Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019Pooled it
- Clinical and Procedural Outcomes of 5-French versus 6-French Sheaths in Transradial Coronary Interventions.Medicine · 2015Pooled it
- Pooled it
- What influences whether researchers adhere to healthcare reporting guidelines successfully? A thematic synthesis.Research integrity and peer review · 2026Article
- Article
- Article
- Improving the reporting on health equity in observational research (STROBE-Equity): extension checklist and elaboration.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2025Article
- GoodReports: developing a website to help health researchers find and use reporting guidelines.BMC medical research methodology · 2021Article
- Measuring Health Equity in Emergency Care Using Routinely Collected Data: A Systematic Review.Health equity · 2021Review
- Usefulness of applying research reporting guidelines as Writing Aid software: a crossover randomised controlled trial.BMJ open · 2019Article
- Theragnostic Use of Radiolabelled Dota-Peptides in Meningioma: From Clinical Demand to Future Applications.Cancers · 2019Review
- Best practices in nutrition science to earn and keep the public's trust.The American journal of clinical nutrition · 2019Review
- Supporting parenting to address social inequalities in health: a synthesis of systematic reviews.BMC public health · 2018Review
- Applying GRADE-CERQual to qualitative evidence synthesis findings-paper 6: how to assess relevance of the data.Implementation science : IS · 2018Article
- Evaluations of the uptake and impact of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Statement and extensions: a scoping review.Systematic reviews · 2017Article
- The influence of the team in conducting a systematic review.Systematic reviews · 2017Article
- Consideration of health inequalities in systematic reviews: a mapping review of guidance.Systematic reviews · 2016Review
- How to build up the actionable knowledge base: the role of 'best fit' framework synthesis for studies of improvement in healthcare.BMJ quality & safety · 2015Article
- Extending the PRISMA statement to equity-focused systematic reviews (PRISMA-E 2012): explanation and elaboration.International journal for equity in health · 2015Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Reporting guidelines can be used to encourage standardised and comprehensive reporting of health research. In light of the global commitment to health equity, we have previously developed and published a reporting guideline for equity-focused systematic reviews (PRISMA-E 2012). The objectives of this study were to explore the utility of the equity extension items included in PRISMA-E 2012 from a systematic review author perspective, including facilitators and barriers to its use. This will assist in designing dissemination and knowledge translation strategies. We conducted a survey of systematic review authors to expose them to the new items in PRISMA-E 2012, establish the extent to which they had historically addressed those items in their own reviews, and gather feedback on the usefulness of the new items. Data were analysed using Microsoft Excel 2008 and Stata (version 11.2 for Mac). Of 151 respondents completing the survey, 18.5% (95% CI: 12.7% to 25.7%) had not heard of the PRISMA statement before, although 83.4% (95% CI: 77.5% to 89.3%) indicated that they plan to use PRISMA-E 2012 in the future, depending on the focus of their review. Most (68.9%; 95% CI: 60.8% to 76.2%) thought that using PRISMA-E 2012 would lead them to conduct their reviews differently. Important facilitators to using PRISMA-E 2012 identified by respondents were journal endorsement and incorporation of the elements of the guideline into systematic review software. Barriers identified were lack of time, word limits and the availability of equity data in primary research. This study has been the first to 'road-test' the new PRISMA-E 2012 reporting guideline and the findings are encouraging. They confirm the acceptability and potential utility of the guideline to assist review authors in reporting on equity in their reviews. The uptake and impact of PRISMA-E 2012 over time on design, conduct and reporting of primary research and systematic reviews should continue to be examined.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.