aims to help authors improve the reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses.
- Evidence-based minimum set of items for reporting in systematic reviews and meta-analyses
- Primarily focuses on the reporting of reviews evaluating the effects of interventions
- Can also be used as a basis for reporting systematic reviews with objectives other than evaluating interventions
High-quality systematic review (SR) reports should accurately document all of the steps and judgments in the SR process using clear language that is understandable to users and stakeholders.
- Should provide enough detail that a knowledgeable reader could reproduce the results
- Summarize the methodological strengths and weaknesses of the SR
- Include language designed to help nonexperts interpret and judge the value of the SR
- Poor reporting/lack of reproducibility is the most common problem with inadequate SRs
- Librarian should be able to provide reproducible search string and methods if included on your team