Skip to main content

Table 4 Characteristics of 57 studies evaluating SR adherence to the PRISMA Statement

From: Evaluations of the uptake and impact of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Statement and extensions: a scoping review

Characteristic

Summary data

Year of study publication

 2011–2014

24 (42%)

 2015–2017

33 (58%)

Focus of SRs evaluated

 Therapeutic interventions (treatment/prevention)

45 (79%)

 Diagnostic

4 (7%)

 Mix (e.g. some therapeutic, some diagnostic)

6 (11%)

 Not specified

2 (4%)

Clinical area of SRs evaluated

 Surgery

14 (25%)

 General medicine

5 (9%)

 Nursing

5 (9%)

 Complementary and alternative medicine

4 (7%)

 Other (specific clinical condition)

29 (51%)

Median number of SRs evaluated

74 (44-144)

Median earliest year of publication of SRs evaluated

2005 (2001–2009)

Median latest year of publication of SRs evaluated

2013 (2011–2015)

Journal of SRs evaluated

 Non-Cochrane only

34 (60%)

 Both Cochrane and non-Cochrane

22 (39%)

 Unclear

2 (11%)

Language of SRs evaluated

 English only

39 (68%)

 Chinese only

9 (16%)

 Portuguese only

1 (2%)

 English and LOE (less than 10% LOE)

6 (11%)

 English and LOE (more than 40% LOE)

2 (4%)

  1. Data given as number (percent) or median (interquartile range)
  2. LOE language other than English, SR systematic review