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 Protocols
Vaccination
Risk of bias
Low reporting quality
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? Not Applicable
Are the methods of the article described in enough detail to replicate the study? Yes