Table 3.
Respondents’ rating to the 27 items of PRISMA (possible score from 1 to 10)
| Item | Mean (SD) | 95% CI | P value* |
| Title | |||
| 1. Identify the report as a systematic review, meta-analysis, or both | 8.98 (1.58) | (8.73 to 9.22) | 0.015 |
| Abstract | |||
| 2. Provide a structured summary including | 8.87 (1.59) | (8.62 to 9.11) | 0.051 |
| Introduction | |||
| 3. Describe the rationale for the review | 8.81 (1.45) | (8.58 to 9.03) | 0.223 |
| 4. Provide an explicit statement of questions being addressed with reference to PICOS | 8.67 (1.61) | (8.42 to 8.92) | 0.962 |
| Method | |||
| 5. Indicate if a review protocol exists | 7.75 (2.18) | (7.41 to 8.08) | <0.001† |
| 6. Specify study and report characteristics used as criteria for eligibility | 8.90 (1.44) | (8.68 to 9.12) | 0.022 |
| 7. Describe all information sources in the search and date last searched | 9.07 (1.26) | (8.87 to 9.26) | <0.001† |
| 8. Present full electronic search strategy for at least one database | 8.61 (1.73) | (8.34 to 8.87) | 0.690 |
| 9. State the process for selecting studies | 9.16 (1.30) | (8.96 to 9.36) | <0.001† |
| 10. Describe method of data extraction from reports and any processes for obtaining and confirming data from investigators | 8.81 (1.54) | (8.57 to 9.04) | 0.247 |
| 11. List and define all variables for which data were sought and any assumptions and simplifications made | 8.70 (1.49) | (8.47 to 8.93) | 0.748 |
| 12. Describe methods used for assessing risk of bias of individual studies and how this information is to be used in any data synthesis | 8.64 (1.64) | (8.39 to 8.89) | 0.833 |
| 13. State the principal summary measures | 8.58 (1.66) | (8.33 to 8.84) | 0.509 |
| 14. Describe the methods of handling data and combining results of studies | 8.87 (1.45) | (8.65 to 9.10) | 0.089 |
| 15. Specify any assessment of risk of bias that may affect the cumulative evidence | 8.71 (1.44) | (8.49 to 8.93) | 0.697 |
| 16. Describe methods of additional analyses | 8.57 (1.60) | (8.33 to 8.82) | 0.455 |
| Results | |||
| 17. Give numbers of studies screened, assessed for eligibility, and included in the review, with reasons for exclusions at each stage, ideally with a flow diagram | 9.35 (1.00) | (9.20 to 9.50) | <0.001† |
| 18. For each study, present characteristics for which data were extracted and provide the citations | 9.01 (1.40) | (8.80 to 9.23) | 0.007 |
| 19. Present data on risk of bias of each study and, if available, any outcome level assessment | 8.45 (1.79) | (8.17 to 8.72) | 0.075 |
| 20. For all outcomes considered (benefits or harms), present, for each study: (1) simple summary data for each intervention group; (2) effect estimates and CIs, ideally with a forest plot | 8.52 (1.64) | (8.27 to 8.77) | 0.231 |
| 21. Present results of each meta-analysis done, including CIs and measures of consistency | 8.73 (1.50) | (8.51 to 8.96) | 0.556 |
| 22. Present results of any assessment of risk of bias across studies | 8.51 (1.65) | (8.25 to 8.76) | 0.202 |
| 23. Give results of additional analyses | 8.48 (1.59) | (8.24 to 8.73) | 0.101 |
| Discussion | |||
| 24. Summarise the main findings including the strength of evidence for each main outcome; consider their relevance to key groups | 9.20 (1.03) | (9.05 to 9.36) | <0.001† |
| 25. Discuss limitations at study and outcome level, and at review-level. | 9.08 (1.30) | (8.89 to 9.28) | <0.001† |
| 26. Provide a general interpretation of the results in the context of other evidence, and implications for future research | 9.27 (0.99) | (9.11 to 9.42) | <0.001† |
| Funding | |||
| 27. Describe sources of funding for the systematic review and other support; role of funders for the systematic review | 8.43 (2.04) | (8.12 to 8.75) | 0.149 |
*P values were computed using paired sample t-test comparing each item with the overall rating.
†Significant at 5% level of significant after the Bonferroni’s adjustment.
PRISMA, Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses.