Edita Runjic1, Tanja Rombey2, Dawid Pieper2, Livia Puljak3. 1. Department of Pediatrics, General Hospital Dubrovnik, Roka Misetica 2, 20000 Dubrovnik, Croatia. 2. Institute for Research in Operative Medicine (IFOM), Department for Evidence-Based Health Services Research, Witten/Herdecke University, Ostmerheimer Str. 200, building 38, 51109 Cologne, Germany. 3. Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine and Health Care, Catholic University of Croatia, Ilica 242, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia. Electronic address: livia.puljak@gmail.com.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to analyze the publication path of non-Cochrane systematic reviews (SR) in the field of anesthesiology and pain registered in the PROSPERO database. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We analyzed characteristics of SRs registered in PROSPERO from its inception to May 2017 and their publication status in August 2018. We surveyed corresponding authors of unpublished SRs about accuracy of PROSPERO status and reasons for nonpublication. RESULTS: After screening 1,408 records from PROSPERO database, we found that the majority had "ongoing" (76.3%) and "completed not published" (9.2%) status. Survey of authors showed that most of the records had not been updated (82.4%, 526/638); SR had already been published in 75.2% (396/526), and work on SR had been discontinued in 7.8% (41/526) of cases. In total, based on PROSPERO status, survey of authors, and database searches, 53.6% (742/1,384) of SRs had been published within a period of 1.3 years or more following their registration. Main reasons for discontinuing work on SR were publication of an SR with similar or same topic by another author team and rejection of SR manuscript. CONCLUSION: Only 16.3% of PROSPERO records had accurate status, and 46.4% of SRs were still unpublished. Further steps to ensure accuracy of PROSPERO status are needed, along with developing strategies for improvement of SR production process.
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to analyze the publication path of non-Cochrane systematic reviews (SR) in the field of anesthesiology and pain registered in the PROSPERO database. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We analyzed characteristics of SRs registered in PROSPERO from its inception to May 2017 and their publication status in August 2018. We surveyed corresponding authors of unpublished SRs about accuracy of PROSPERO status and reasons for nonpublication. RESULTS: After screening 1,408 records from PROSPERO database, we found that the majority had "ongoing" (76.3%) and "completed not published" (9.2%) status. Survey of authors showed that most of the records had not been updated (82.4%, 526/638); SR had already been published in 75.2% (396/526), and work on SR had been discontinued in 7.8% (41/526) of cases. In total, based on PROSPERO status, survey of authors, and database searches, 53.6% (742/1,384) of SRs had been published within a period of 1.3 years or more following their registration. Main reasons for discontinuing work on SR were publication of an SR with similar or same topic by another author team and rejection of SR manuscript. CONCLUSION: Only 16.3% of PROSPERO records had accurate status, and 46.4% of SRs were still unpublished. Further steps to ensure accuracy of PROSPERO status are needed, along with developing strategies for improvement of SR production process.
Authors: Alison Booth; Alex S Mitchell; Andrew Mott; Sophie James; Sarah Cockayne; Samantha Gascoyne; Catriona McDaid Journal: F1000Res Date: 2020-07-27