ArticleCochrane evidence synthesis and methods2026
PRISMA 2020 Is a Reporting Guideline for Systematic Reviews but Is Often Misused to Guide Review Content.
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.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.