Dwan 2013a.

Methods	Investigated discrepancies between systematic review protocols and published systematic reviews.
Data	N = 46 systematic reviews Inclusion criteria: Systematic reviews published by the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders (CFGD) group in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews before 2010. Exclusion criteria: Non‐Cochrane systematic reviews or reviews published by a different Cochrane Review Group. Year(s) of publication of the systematic reviews: 2006 to 2009 Areas of health care addressed by the systematic reviews: Cystic Fibrosis and genetic disorders Methodological quality of systematic reviews: Not assessed Number (proportion) of systematic reviews that only included RCTs: 7 reviews did not identify any RCTs, the remaining reviews only included RCTs Number (proportion) of systematic reviews that are Cochrane Reviews: 46 (100%) Extent of overlap of RCTs included in the systematic reviews in the empirical study: Not assessed, though unlikely to have impacted on the results
Comparisons	Systematic review protocols versus published systematic reviews
Outcomes	Prevalence of systematic reviews with: any discrepancy in at least one outcome measure (primary, secondary or unlabelled) from protocol to full review; an upgrade of at least one outcome from secondary in the protocol to primary in the full review; a downgrade of at least one outcome from primary in the protocol to secondary in the full review; addition of at least one new outcome (primary, secondary, or unlabelled) in the review that was not specified at all in the protocol; omission of at least one outcome (primary, secondary, or unlabelled) in the review that was listed in the protocol.
Notes	Study published as a journal article and conference abstract. Additional unpublished data retrieved from the authors.
Risk of bias
Item	Authors' judgement	Description
Is the empirical study at low risk of selection bias?	Yes	Quote: "A cohort of systematic reviews published by the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders (CFGD) group on the Cochrane Library before 2010 were identified". Quote: "The CFGD group had 46 cystic fibrosis systematic reviews published as of 2010". Comment: This empirical study included all systematic reviews with an available protocol, which were published during a specified time period.
Is the empirical study at low risk of selective reporting bias?	Yes	Comment: Data for all outcomes and analyses specified in an unpublished study protocol (provided by the authors on request) were either reported in the publications or provided by the authors.