Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25554246›Full record

ArticleSystematic reviews2015

Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement.

David Moher, Larissa Shamseer, Mike Clarke, Davina Ghersi, Alessandro Liberati, Mark Petticrew, Paul Shekelle, Lesley A Stewart, PRISMA-P Group

3 registry-linked trialsAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Systematic reviews, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 3 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 11,375 papers, 63 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11,375citing papers in PubMed, 63 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT03234101 unknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2016, after this paper: background citation

Relation of Low-risk Lifestyle Behaviours With Cardiovascular Disease, Diabetes, Cancer and All-Cause Mortality: A Series of Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses of Prospective Cohort Studies

TypeobservationalSponsorUniversity of TorontoRan2016 to 2017Enrolled1ConditionsCardiovascular Disease, Diabetes, Cancer, MortalityArmsLow-risk lifestyle behaviours
NCT04496180 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2021, after this paper: background citation

Standard Wound Dressing Versus Prophylactic Negative-pressure Wound Therapy After Emergency Laparotomy: a Randomized Controlled Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity Hospital, GenevaRan2021 to 2025Enrolled334ConditionsSurgical Site Infection, Length of Stay, Seroma, HematomaArmsClosed incision negative pressure therapy versus standard dressing after emergency abdominal laparotomies
NCT04633070 unknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2020, after this paper: background citation

Use of Gamification in Health Apps for Lifestyle Intervention: A Systematic Review

TypeobservationalSponsorUniversity of TorontoRan2020 to 2022Enrolled100ConditionsMobile Applications, Diet, Healthy, Behavior, HealthArmsGamification
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11,375 citing papers in PubMed, 63 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Pooled it
  15. Pooled it
  16. Pooled it
  17. Nutrition and physical activity interventions delivered to children and young people during cancer treatment: a systematic literature review.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Pooled it
  18. Pooled it
  19. Pooled it
  20. Pooled it

11,315 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

David MoherOttawa Hospital Research Institute and University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada. dmoher@ohri.ca.
Larissa Shamseer
Mike Clarke
Davina Ghersi
Alessandro Liberati
Mark Petticrew
Paul Shekelle
Lesley A Stewart
PRISMA-P Group

Funding

Cancer Research UK 16895CIHR 114369Medical Research Council G0901530Medical Research Council MR/K025643/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Systematic reviews should build on a protocol that describes the rationale, hypothesis, and planned methods of the review; few reviews report whether a protocol exists. Detailed, well-described protocols can facilitate the understanding and appraisal of the review methods, as well as the detection of modifications to methods and selective reporting in completed reviews. We describe the development of a reporting guideline, the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses for Protocols 2015 (PRISMA-P 2015). PRISMA-P consists of a 17-item checklist intended to facilitate the preparation and reporting of a robust protocol for the systematic review. Funders and those commissioning reviews might consider mandating the use of the checklist to facilitate the submission of relevant protocol information in funding applications. Similarly, peer reviewers and editors can use the guidance to gauge the completeness and transparency of a systematic review protocol submitted for publication in a journal or other medium.

Indexed as

Guideline AdherenceMeta-Analysis as TopicSystematic Reviews as TopicAccess to InformationChecklistEvidence-Based MedicineHumansPublishingQuality Control

Identifiers

PMID25554246
PMCPMC4320440

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.