PRISMA harms checklist: improving harms reporting in systematic reviews
University of Alberta · Stanford University · +6 more institutions
Abstract
For any health intervention, accurate knowledge of both benefits and harms is needed. Systematic reviews often compound poor reporting of harms in primary studies by failing to report harms or doing so inadequately. While the PRISMA statement (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses) helps systematic review authors ensure complete and transparent reporting, it is focused mainly on efficacy. Thus, a PRISMA harms checklist has been developed to improve harms reporting in systematic reviews, promoting a more balanced assessment of benefits and harms.
A development strategy, endorsed by the EQUATOR Network and existing reporting guidelines (including the PRISMA statement, PRISMA for abstracts, and PRISMA for protocols), was used. After the development of a draft checklist of items, a modified Delphi process was initiated. The Delphi consisted of three rounds of electronic feedback followed by an in-person meeting.
Citation impact
- FWCI
- 35.86
- Percentile
- 100%
- References
- 94
Authors
9Topics & keywords
- Checklist
- Systematic review
- Delphi method
- Medicine
- Harm
- Relevance (law)
- MEDLINE
- Intervention (counseling)