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
Article Type Empirical
Article Subtype Cross-sectional survey/Methodological systematic review
First Author Country South Africa
Checklists • PRISMA 2009
Aim To assess the reporting quality (PRISMA) of systematic reviews of interventions aimed at improving vaccination coverage indexed up to May 2016.
Level of Investigation Descriptive
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%).
Number of systematic reviews included 57
Number of eligible systematic reviews assessed 2322
Treatment impacted No
Treatment impacted description
Interpretation impacted Not Applicable
Interpretation impacted description