The nuts and bolts of PROSPERO: An international prospective register of systematic reviews

Systematic Reviews

Volumn 1, Issue 1, 2012, Pages

  Booth, Alison ^a   Clarke, Mike ^b   Dooley, Gordon ^c   Ghersi, Davina ^d   Moher, David ^e,f   Petticrew, Mark ^g   Stewart, Lesley ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF YORK   (United Kingdom)

^b QUEEN'S UNIVERSITY BELFAST   (United Kingdom)

^c Metaxis Ltd   (United Kingdom)

^d NATIONAL HEALTH AND MEDICAL RESEARCH COUNCIL   (Australia)

^e OTTAWA HOSPITAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Canada)

^f UNIVERSITY OF OTTAWA   (Canada)

^g LONDON SCHOOL OF HYGIENE AND TROPICAL MEDICINE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

PROSPERO; register; Systematic review protocol

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL PROTOCOL; PUBLICATION; PUBLISHING; REGISTER; REGISTRATION; STUDY DESIGN; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW (TOPIC); EVIDENCE BASED PRACTICE; INFORMATION DISSEMINATION; INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION; INTERNET; LITERATURE; STANDARD;

EVIDENCE-BASED PRACTICE; INFORMATION DISSEMINATION; INTERNATIONALITY; INTERNET; REGISTRIES; REVIEW LITERATURE AS TOPIC;

EID: 84865403851     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20464053     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/2046-4053-1-2     Document Type: Article

References (10)

1. Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, Gøtzsche PC, Ioannidis JPA, Clarke M, Devereaux PJ, Kleijnen J, Moher D. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. PLoS Med 2009, 6:e1000100. 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000100, 2707010, 19621070.
2. Moher D, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, The PRISMA Group Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med 2009, 6:e1000097. 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097, 2707599, 19621072, The PRISMA Group.
3. Dwan K, Altman D, Cresswell L, Blundell M, Gamble C, Williamson P. Comparison of protocols and registry entries to published reports for randomised controlled trials. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2011, (Issue 1):Art. No.: MR000031.
4. Booth A, Clarke M, Ghersi D, Moher D, Petticrew M, Stewart L. An international registry of systematic review protocols. Lancet 2011, 377:108-109. 10.1016/S0140-6736(10)60903-8, 20630580.
5. Booth A, Wright K, Outhwaite H. Centre for Reviews and Dissemination databases: value, content, and developments. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2010, 26:470-472. 10.1017/S0266462310000978, 20923587.
6. Booth A, Clarke M, Ghersi D, Moher D, Petticrew M, Stewart L. Establishing a minimum dataset for prospective registration of systematic reviews: an international consultation. PLoS ONE 2011, 6:e27319. 10.1371/journal.pone.0027319, 3217945, 22110625.
7. Clarke M, Hopewell S, Chalmers I. Clinical trials should begin and end with systematic reviews of relevant evidence: 12 years and waiting. Lancet 2010, 376:20-21. 10.1016/S0140-6736(10)61045-8, 20609983.
8. Tricco A, Tetzlaff J, Sampson M, Fergusson D, Cogo E, Horsley T, Moher D. Few systematic reviews exist documenting the extent of bias: a systematic review. J Clin Epidemiol 2008, 61:422-434. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2007.10.017, 18394534.
9. Tricco A, Pham B, Brehaut J, Tetroe J, Cappelli M, Hopewell S, Lavis J, Berlin J, Moher D. An international survey indicated that unpublished systematic reviews exist. J Clin Epidemiol 2009, 62:617-623. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2008.09.014, 19162440.
10. Moher D, Tsertsvadze A. Systematic reviews: when is an update an update?. Lancet 2006, 367:881-882. 10.1016/S0140-6736(06)68358-X, 16546523.