Selection/Topic

#

Checklist Item

DISCUSSION

 

 

Summary of evidence

24

Summarize the main findings, including the strength of evidence for each main outcome; consider their relevance to key groups (e.g., healthcare providers, users, and policy makers).

Limitations

25

Discuss limitations at a study and outcome level (e.g., risk of bias) and at review level (e.g., incomplete retrieval of identified research, reporting bias).

Conclusions

26

Provide a general interpretation of the results in the context of other evidence and implications for future research.

FUNDING

 

 

Funding

27

Describe sources of funding for the systematic review and other support (e.g., supply of data) and the role of funders for the systematic review.

SOURCES: Liberati et al. (2009); Moher et al. (2009).

REFERENCES

Liberati, A., D. G. Altman, J. Tetzlaff, C. Mulrow, P. Gotzsche, J. P. Ioannidis, M. Clarke, P. J. Devereaux, J. Kleijnen, and D. Moher. 2009. The PRISMA Statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analysis of studies that evaluate health care interventions: Explanation and elaboration. Annals of Internal Medicine 151(4):W11–W30.

Moher, D., A. Liberati, J. Tetzlaff, and D. G. Altman. 2009. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLoS Medicine 6(7):1–6.



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement