Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement.

By David Moher, A. Liberati, Jennifer Tetzlaff, Douglas G. Altman. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 2009

1,018 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, General Health Professions, Statistics and Probability

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/c13dd3a682fb14c3e0437d96d73699d52f6dbb82

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Economics and Econometrics

1. David Moher
2. I. Boutron
3. Matthew J. Page
4. Larissa Shamseer
5. Patrick M. M. Bossuyt
6. J. Tetzlaff
7. C. Mulrow
8. Jeremy M. Grimshaw

In General Health Professions

1. David Moher
2. Matthew J. Page
3. Larissa Shamseer
4. L. Stewart
5. Tianjing Li
6. J. Tetzlaff
7. Luke A. McGuinness
8. Patrick M. M. Bossuyt

In Statistics and Probability

1. David Moher
2. Matthew J. Page
3. Larissa Shamseer
4. I. Boutron
5. Patrick M. M. Bossuyt
6. C. Mulrow
7. J. Tetzlaff
8. Douglas G. Altman

Citations in the corpus

• The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. (2021, positive): “Where there is relevant content from other reporting guidelines, we reference these guidelines within the items in the explanation and elaboration paper 41 (such as PRISMA-Search 42 in items 6 and 7, Synthesis without meta-analysis (SWiM) reporting guideline 27 in item 13d).”
• Quarantine alone or in combination with other public health measures to control COVID‐19: a rapid review (2020, neutral): “[DOI: 10.1093/ jtm/taaa021] Moher 2009 Moher D, Liberati A, TetzlaK J, Altman DG. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA Statement.”
• Diabetes mellitus in people with schizophrenia, bipolar disorder and major depressive disorder: a systematic review and large scale meta‐analysis (2016, positive): “This systematic review was conducted in accordance with the Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) guidelines (21) and in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) standard (22).”
• Updating guidance for reporting systematic reviews: development of the PRISMA 2020 statement. (2020, neutral): “In 2009, an international group of systematic reviewers, methodologists, clinicians and journal editors disseminated the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and MetaAnalyses (PRISMA) statement, a guideline designed to help authors prepare a complete report of their systematic review (1-”