PRISMA 2020 statement: What's new and the importance of reporting guidelines

• DOI: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2021.105918
• Publication Date: 2021-03-29T00:28:34Z
• Authors: Catrin Sohrabi; Thomas Franchi; Ginimol Mathew; Ahmed Kerwan; Maria Nicola; Michelle Griffin; Maliha Agha; Riaz Agha
• Keywords: Publishing; Research Report; 03 medical and health sciences; 0302 clinical medicine; Humans; Guidelines as Topic; Checklist; Systematic Reviews as Topic; 3. Good health

The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, first published in 2009 [1], was developed in an attempt to increase the clarity, transparency, quality and value of these reports [2]. The 27-item checklist and four-phase flow diagram have become the hallmark of academic rigour in the publication of systematic reviews and meta-analyses, having been cited by over 60,000 papers [3]. These are frequently endorsed by journals in their 'Instructions to Authors' [4]. Developments in the methodology and terminology used when conducting systematic reviews [5], alongside the identification of limitations responsible for poor adherence, such as the use of ambiguous wording [6], have warranted an update to the PRISMA statement. The PRISMA 2020 statement, therefore, is intended to reflect this recent evolution in the identification, selection, appraisal and synthesis of research [7]. Here, we present an interpretive analysis of the updated statement, with a view towards encouraging its adoption by both journals and authors in the pursuit of advancing evidence-based medicine.