Evidence mapPaperPMID 42583155Full record

ArticleCochrane evidence synthesis and methods2026

PRISMA 2020 Is a Reporting Guideline for Systematic Reviews but Is Often Misused to Guide Review Content.

Lasse Østengaard, Christoffer Bruun Korfitsen, Asbjørn Hróbjartsson, David Ruben Teindl Laursen, Camilla Hansen Nejstgaard

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cochrane evidence synthesis and methods, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

5 authors.

Lasse ØstengaardCochrane Denmark and Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine Odense (CEBMO), Department of Clinical Research University of Southern Denmark Odense Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7033-3722
Christoffer Bruun KorfitsenCochrane Denmark and Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine Odense (CEBMO), Department of Clinical Research University of Southern Denmark Odense Denmark.
Asbjørn HróbjartssonCochrane Denmark and Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine Odense (CEBMO), Department of Clinical Research University of Southern Denmark Odense Denmark.
David Ruben Teindl LaursenCochrane Denmark and Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine Odense (CEBMO), Department of Clinical Research University of Southern Denmark Odense Denmark.
Camilla Hansen NejstgaardCochrane Denmark and Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine Odense (CEBMO), Department of Clinical Research University of Southern Denmark Odense Denmark.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) is a reporting guideline aiming to facilitate transparent and accurate reporting in systematic reviews. The latest version, PRISMA 2020, specifies that it is intended for guiding the reporting, not the conduct, of systematic reviews. We examined how often systematic review authors reported having used PRISMA 2020 outside its scope. Methods: We randomly sampled 200 systematic reviews citing PRISMA 2020 and extracted all sentences describing how PRISMA 2020 was used. Two authors independently assessed the extracted sentences and categorised the use of PRISMA 2020 as one of the following options: adequate (i.e., as a reporting guideline), inconclusive (e.g., unclear or ambiguous description) or inadequate (e.g., to guide review conduct). Results: The systematic reviews were published between 2021 and 2024, and 88.0% were published in biomedical journals. More than half (55.5%) of the systematic reviews described using PRISMA 2020 inadequately, typically as a guide for review conduct; 24.0% were categorised as 'inconclusive', and only 20.5% were categorised as 'adequate'. Conclusion: More than half of the systematic reviews described using PRISMA 2020 outside its intended scope. We encourage systematic review authors to use PRISMA 2020 as a reporting guideline. Other resources are available to guide the conduct of systematic reviews, e.g., the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions.

Identifiers

PMID42583155
PMCPMC13459888

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.