Systematic Review and Evidence Synthesis

• PRISMA reporting guidelines
• Systematic review guidance
• Meta-analysis guidance
• Scoping review guidance
• Evidence and gap map guidance
• Rapid review guidance
• Qualitative meta-synthesis guidance
• Umbrella review guidance

Prisma Statement Introduction

The PRISMA statement is the main reporting standard for evidence synthesis. The acronym refers to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. In addition to the main PRISMA statement there are many extensions for other methodologies; these are notated by a suffix. Please refer to www.prisma-statement.org for the most recent information and updates and a complete list of extensions. We list only the most frequently used on this page.

When using PRISMA or its extensions it is important to carefully read the key documents. Typically there will be a paper introducing the standard and its development,  an "E&E" or "Explanation & Elaboration" paper which explains the components of the statement and gives examples, and a checklist, which helps the authors make sure they fully comply in reporting their study.

One of the most familiar aspects of PRISMA is the flow diagram which summarized the flow of information through the process, from record identification through screening and synthesis. Only including the flow diagram is not enough to comply with PRISMA or its extensions.

PRISMA Key Documents

• PRISMA 2020 Checklist
• PRISMA 2020 flow diagram
• PRISMA 2020 Statement
• PRISMA 2020 Explanation and Elaboration

PRISMA Extensions

• PRISMA for Abstracts
• PRISMA for Acupuncture
• PRISMA for Diagnostic Test Accuracy
• PRISMA for EcoEvo
• PRISMA Equity
• PRISMA Harms (for reviews including Harm outcomes)
• PRISMA Individual Patient Data
• PRISMA for Network Meta-Analyses
• PRISMA for Protocols
• PRISMA for Scoping Reviews
• PRISMA for Searching
• Extensions in development

• Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions

• Finding What Works in Health Care: Standards for Systematic Reviews

• An Introduction to Systematic Reviews

• JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis

• Research synthesis and meta-analysis : a step-by-step approach (Fifth edition.)
  Cooper. (2017). Research synthesis and meta-analysis : a step-by-step approach (Fifth edition.). SAGE Publications, Inc.

• JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis - Chapter 11: Scoping Reviews
• Tricco, A., Lillie, E., Zarin, W., O'Brien, K., Colquhoun, H., Levac, D., . . . Straus, S. (2018). PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and explanation. Annals of Internal Medicine, 169(7), 467-473. https://doi.org/10.7326/M18-0850.  
• Arksey, H. & O'Malley, L. (2005) Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 8:1, 19-32, DOI: 10.1080/1364557032000119616
• Peters, M.D., Marnie, C., Tricco, A.C., Pollock, D., Munn, Z., Alexander, L., McInerney, P., Godfrey, C.M. and Khalil, H., (2020). Updated methodological guidance for the conduct of scoping reviews. JBI Evidence Synthesis, 18(10), pp.2119-2126.
• Munn Z, Peters MDJ, Stern C, Tufanaru C, McArthur A, Aromataris E. Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2018;18(1):143. doi: 10.1186/s12874-018-0611-x (Open access)

• White, H., Albers, B., Gaarder, M., Kornør, H., Little, J., Marshall, Z., Mathew, C., Pigott, T., Snilsveit, B., Waddington, H., & Welch, V. (2020). Guidance for producing a Campbell evidence and gap map. Campbell Systematic Review, 16(4).
• Ashrita Saran. (2020). Evidence and gap maps. Campbell Systematic Review, 16(1).
• Ashrita Saran, & Howard White. (2018). Evidence and gap maps: A comparison of different approaches. Campbell Systematic Review, 14(1), 1-38.

• Tricco, A., Antony, J., Zarin, W., Strifler, L., Ghassemi, M., Ivory, J., Perrier, L., Hutton, B., Moher, D., & Straus, S. (2015). A scoping review of rapid review methods. BMC Medicine, 13(1), 224.

• Aguirre, R. T., & Bolton, K. W. (2014). Qualitative interpretive meta-synthesis in social work research: Uncharted territory. Journal of Social Work, 14(3), 279-294. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468017313476797
• Hannes, K., & Lockwood, C. (2012). Synthesizing Qualitative Research: Choosing the Right Approach. John Wiley & Sons. 
• Sandelowski, M., & Barroso, J. (2002). Reading Qualitative Studies. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 1(1), 74-108.

• JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis - Chapter 10: Umbrella Reviews
• Aromataris, E., Fernandez, R.S., Godfrey, C., Holly, C., Khalil, H., & Tungpunkom, P. (2014). Methodology for JBI umbrella reviews.