Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 Apr 1;109(2):174-200.
doi: 10.5195/jmla.2021.962.

PRISMA-S: an extension to the PRISMA statement for reporting literature searches in systematic reviews

Melissa L Rethlefsen  1 , Shona Kirtley  2 , Siw Waffenschmidt  3 , Ana Patricia Ayala  4 , David Moher  5 , Matthew J Page  6 , Jonathan B Koffel  7 ; PRISMA-S Group
Affiliations

PRISMA-S: an extension to the PRISMA statement for reporting literature searches in systematic reviews

Melissa L Rethlefsen et al. J Med Libr Assoc. .

Abstract

Background: Literature searches underlie the foundations of systematic reviews and related review types. Yet, the literature searching component of systematic reviews and related review types is often poorly reported. Guidance for literature search reporting has been diverse and, in many cases, does not offer enough detail to authors who need more specific information about reporting search methods and information sources in a clear, reproducible way. This document presents the PRISMA-S (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses literature search extension) checklist, and explanation and elaboration.

Methods: The checklist was developed using a three-stage Delphi survey process, followed by a consensus conference and public review process.

Results: The final checklist includes sixteen reporting items, each of which is detailed with exemplar reporting and rationale.

Conclusions: The intent of PRISMA-S is to complement the PRISMA Statement and its extensions by providing a checklist that could be used by interdisciplinary authors, editors, and peer reviewers to verify that each component of a search is completely reported and, therefore, reproducible.

Keywords: information retrieval; literature search; reporting guidelines; reproducibility; search strategies; systematic reviews.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
PRISMA 2009 flow diagram [133]
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Lefebvre C, Glanville J, Briscoe S, Littlewood A, Marshall C, Metzendorf MI, Noel-Storr A, Rader T, Shokraneh F, Thomas J, Wieland L. Searching for and selecting studies. In: Higgins J, Thomas J, Chandler J, Cumpston M, Li T, Page M, Welch V, eds. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Version 6.0. Cochrane; 2019.
    1. Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. Systematic reviews: CRD's guidance for undertaking reviews in health care. 1.3 Undertaking the review [Internet]. The Centre, University of York; 2009. [cited 31 Jan 2020]. <https://www.york.ac.uk/media/crd/Systematic_Reviews.pdf>.
    1. Lefebvre C, Glanville J, Briscoe S, Littlewood A, Marshall C, Metzendorf MI. Technical supplement to chapter 4: searching for and selecting studies. In: Higgins JPT, Thomas J, Chandler J, Cumpston M, Li T, Page MJ, eds. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Version 6.0: Cochrane; 2019.
    1. Relevo R, Balshem H. Finding evidence for comparing medical interventions: AHRQ and the Effective Health Care Program. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011. November;64(11):1168–77. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.11.022. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Institute of Medicine (US), Committee on Standards for Systematic Reviews of Comparative Effectiveness Research, Eden J. Finding what works in health care: standards for systematic reviews. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2011. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources