Katharina Allers1, Falk Hoffmann2, Tim Mathes3, Dawid Pieper3. 1. Department of Health Services Research, School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Carl von Ossietzky University Oldenburg, Oldenburg, Germany. Electronic address: katharina.allers@uni-oldenburg.de. 2. Department of Health Services Research, School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Carl von Ossietzky University Oldenburg, Oldenburg, Germany. 3. Institute for Research in Operative Medicine, Faculty of Health, School of Medicine, Witten/Herdecke University, Cologne, Germany.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To explore trends in published protocols of systematic reviews (SRs) and to analyze how SRs with published protocols differ from those without. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We searched PubMed up to December 31, 2016 to identify SR protocols. We also searched for the corresponding SR for each protocol published in 2012 and 2013 and matched this with an SR without published protocol by year and journal. RESULTS: The number of protocols published increased from 42 in 2012 to 404 in 2016; 125 were published in 2012 and 2013. One-third of SRs remained unpublished after 3-5 years. We included 80 SRs with protocols and 80 controls. SRs with protocols reported their methods more comprehensively than their controls, but their median time from search to submission was longer (325 vs. 122 days; P < 0.001). Almost two-thirds of the SRs with protocols and about 10% of the controls could be found in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO). CONCLUSION: Time from search to submission was longer for SRs with published protocols, while at the same time SRs with published protocols were better elaborated and reported. As quality, transparency, and currency are cornerstones of SRs, we suggest critically discussing the current practice of publishing SR protocols.
OBJECTIVE: To explore trends in published protocols of systematic reviews (SRs) and to analyze how SRs with published protocols differ from those without. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We searched PubMed up to December 31, 2016 to identify SR protocols. We also searched for the corresponding SR for each protocol published in 2012 and 2013 and matched this with an SR without published protocol by year and journal. RESULTS: The number of protocols published increased from 42 in 2012 to 404 in 2016; 125 were published in 2012 and 2013. One-third of SRs remained unpublished after 3-5 years. We included 80 SRs with protocols and 80 controls. SRs with protocols reported their methods more comprehensively than their controls, but their median time from search to submission was longer (325 vs. 122 days; P < 0.001). Almost two-thirds of the SRs with protocols and about 10% of the controls could be found in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO). CONCLUSION: Time from search to submission was longer for SRs with published protocols, while at the same time SRs with published protocols were better elaborated and reported. As quality, transparency, and currency are cornerstones of SRs, we suggest critically discussing the current practice of publishing SR protocols.
Authors: Isabel Viguera-Guerra; Juan Ruano; Macarena Aguilar-Luque; Jesús Gay-Mimbrera; Ana Montilla; Jose Luis Fernández-Rueda; José Fernández-Chaichio; Juan Luis Sanz-Cabanillas; Pedro Jesús Gómez-Arias; Antonio Vélez García-Nieto; Francisco Gómez-Garcia; Beatriz Isla-Tejera Journal: PLoS One Date: 2019-02-27 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Alison Booth; Alex S Mitchell; Andrew Mott; Sophie James; Sarah Cockayne; Samantha Gascoyne; Catriona McDaid Journal: F1000Res Date: 2020-07-27