More systematic reviews were registered in PROSPERO each year, but few records’ status was up-to-date

Ref ID 609
First Author T. Rombey
Journal JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY
Year Of Publishing 2020
URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S089543561930650X
Keywords Protocols
General medical
Currency
Problem(s) Unpublished or "zombie" reviews (the file-drawer effect)
Number of systematic reviews included 500
Summary of Findings For more than half of the analysed PROSPERO records (40/75; 53.3%), only one version existed, which means they have never been updated since their initial creation. 84.0% of the 75 analysed PROSPERO records were not up-to-date, and, although the SRs had already been published, 65.3% of the 75 analysed PROSPERO records were still listed as ‘‘ongoing.’’
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