PROSPERO
PROSPERO – a registry for protocols of systematic reviews
We strongly encourage authors of systematic reviews to register their detailed protocols before data extraction commences in a public registry such as PROSPERO (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/). The number obtained during the registration should be provided in the submitted paper – both in the Materials and Methods section and at the end of the main body of the manuscript – using the following disclaimer:
This systematic review has been registered in the PROSPERO registry under No. [NUMBER PROVIDED BY PROSPERO].
More information about PROSPERO here:
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/documents/Registering%20a%20review%20on%20PROSPERO.pdf
Prospective registration of systematic reviews promotes transparency, helps reduce the potential for bias and serves to avoid unintended duplication of reviews. A single point of access to information about ongoing reviews should also help avoid the unintended duplication of reviews and wasting of resources, a consideration that is more important than ever in the current economic climate.
Registration allows researchers to comply with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) tenets (https://www.prisma-statement.org/) and provides a permanent public record of their planned methods. It may also help raise awareness of their review. Use of the unique registration number may be useful in helping track subsequent use or citation of the review to monitor its impact.
Commissioning and funding organizations can utilize PROSPERO to identify ongoing and unpublished reviews to help them avoid unplanned duplication and waste of financial resources.
Guideline developers could use information about forthcoming reviews to assist in the planning and timing of guideline development.
Peer reviewers will be able to link a manuscript to the corresponding registration record (and, where available, through to the full protocol). The registration record and/or the protocol may provide important additional information about, and clarity regarding, the methods that are absent from the manuscript. It could also speed the process because some issues of clarification that would otherwise be sent back to the authors as questions could be resolved by checking the registration record or protocol, thereby circumventing a round of question-and-response between reviewers, journal editors and authors.
Given that an underlying aim of registration is to help ensure that health and social care decisions are informed by good-quality systematic review evidence, registration is also in the public interest. As many systematic reviews are funded by the public purse, helping to avoid wasting money on unintended duplication should also be welcomed.
Registration in PROSPERO requires the provision of 22 data items, with the option to provide details of a further 18 items, and generally takes around 30 minutes to complete.
.png)