Department of Anesthesiology, Eastern Hepatobiliary Surgical Hospital, Second Military Medical University, Shanghai, China.
PLoS One. 2011;6(11):e27611. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0027611. Epub 2011 Nov 16.
The PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items of Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses) Statement was published to help authors improve how they report systematic reviews. It is unknown how many journals mention PRISMA in their instructions to authors, or whether stronger journal language regarding use of PRISMA improves author compliance.
METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: An Internet-based investigation examined the extent to which 146 leading medical journals have incorporated the PRISMA Statement into their instructions to authors. Results were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Also, systematic reviews published in the leading anesthesiology journals and the QUOROM (QUality Of Reporting Of Meta-analyses) Statement were used to explore the hypothesis that indicating compliance with the QUOROM Statement in the manuscript is associated with improved compliance with the reporting guideline. In a sample of 146 journals publishing systematic reviews, the PRISMA Statement was referred to in the instructions to authors for 27% (40/146) of journals; more often in general and internal medicine journals (7/14; 50%) than in specialty medicine journals (33/132; 25%). In the second part of the study, 13 systematic reviews published in the leading anesthesiology journals in 2008 were included for appraisal. Mention of the QUOROM Statement in the manuscript was associated with higher compliance with the QUOROM checklist (P = 0.022).
CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: Most of the leading medical journals used ambiguous language regarding what was expected of authors. Further improvement on quality of reporting of systematic reviews may entail journals clearly informing authors of their requirements. Stronger directions, such as requiring an indication of adherence to a research quality of reporting statement in the manuscript, may improve reporting and utility of systematic reviews.
PRISMA（系统评价和荟萃分析的首选报告项目）声明的发布是为了帮助作者提高系统评价报告的质量。目前尚不清楚有多少期刊在其作者投稿指南中提到了 PRISMA，或者关于使用 PRISMA 的更有力的期刊语言是否能提高作者的遵从性。
方法/主要发现：一项基于互联网的调查研究了 146 种领先的医学期刊在其作者投稿指南中纳入 PRISMA 声明的程度。结果使用描述性统计进行分析。此外，还使用了发表在领先的麻醉学期刊和 QUOROM（荟萃分析报告质量）声明中的系统评价来探索以下假设：在稿件中表明符合 QUOROM 声明与提高报告指南的遵从性有关。在纳入的 146 种发表系统评价的期刊中，有 27%（40/146）的期刊在投稿指南中提到了 PRISMA 声明；在一般和内科期刊中（7/14；50%）比在专科医学期刊中更常见（33/132；25%）。在研究的第二部分，纳入了 2008 年发表在领先的麻醉学期刊中的 13 篇系统评价进行评估。在稿件中提到 QUOROM 声明与更符合 QUOROM 清单的遵从性相关（P=0.022）。
结论/意义：大多数领先的医学期刊在期望作者做什么方面使用了模糊的语言。进一步提高系统评价报告的质量可能需要期刊清楚地告知作者他们的要求。更有力的指导，如在稿件中要求表明对研究报告质量声明的遵守情况，可能会提高系统评价的报告质量和实用性。
