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