Reporting quality of systematic reviews of interventions aimed at improving vaccination coverage: compliance with PRISMA guidelines

Ref ID	304
First Author	V. N. Ndze
Journal	HUMAN VACCINES & IMMUNOTHERAPEUTICS
Year Of Publishing	2019
URL	https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/21645515.2019.1623998?needAccess=true
Keywords	• Vaccination • Protocols • Low reporting quality • Risk of bias
Problem(s)	• No registered or published protocol • Poor execution of narrative synthesis • Low reporting (PRISMA) quality • No quality assessment undertaken or reported
Number of systematic reviews included	57
Summary of Findings	Median compliance with PRISMA across included reviews was 70%. Compliance was poorest in the items “describing summary of evidence” (item 24, 19%), “describing indication of review protocol and registration” (item 5, 26%) and “describing results of risk of bias across studies (item 22, 33%).
Did the article find that the problem(s) led to qualitative changes in interpretation of the results?	N/A
Are the methods of the article described in enough detail to replicate the study?	Yes