Relation of the completeness of reporting of rapid reviews to journal publication status: protocol for a comparative, cross-sectional methodological study

Adrienne Stevens; Chantelle Garritty; Kusala Pussegoda; Lisa Hartling; Lesley Stewart; Kednapa Thavorn; Andrea C. Tricco; Vivian Welch; David Moher

Relation of the completeness of reporting of rapid reviews to journal publication status: protocol for a comparative, cross-sectional methodological study

Article 2017 en

Abstract

1 min read

This project will compare the completeness of reporting of journal-published rapid reviews with those not published in journals according to four reporting tools: PRISMA, PRISMA-P, Cochrane MECIR reporting standards, and IOM reporting standards

Discussion(0)

No comments yet. Be the first to comment.

Related publications

Editorial Material2019

Steps toward more complete reporting of systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Diagnostic Test Accuracy (PRISMA-DTA)

Trevor A. McGrath, David Moher, Matthew D. F. McInnes

Article2009

Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement

David Moher

Article2024

Reporting of methodological studies in health research: A protocol for the development of the MethodologIcal STudy reportIng Checklist (MISTIC)

Stefan Schandelmaier, Brett D. Thombs, Matthias Briel, Peter Tugwell, Daeria O. Lawson, David B. Allison, David Moher, Janus Christian Jakobsen, Gordon Guyatt, Evan Mayo‐Wilson, Dawid Pieper, Livia Puljak, Zainab Samaan, Lawrence Mbuagbaw, Vivian Welch, A.-W. Chan, Romina Brignardello‐Petersen, Lehana Thabane, Anders Kehlet Nørskov, Taryn Young, Gary S. Collins

Editorial Material2016

Implementing PRISMA-P: recommendations for prospective authors

David Moher, Lesley Stewart, Paul Shekelle

Article2016

Quality of conduct and reporting in rapid reviews: an exploration of compliance with PRISMA and AMSTAR guidelines

Shannon Kelly, David Moher, Tammy Clifford