Has the Reporting Quality of Systematic Review Abstracts in Nursing Improved Since the Release of PRISMA for Abstracts? A Survey of High-Profile Nursing Journals

Ref ID 803
First Author W. Jiancheng
Journal WORLDVIEWS ON EVIDENCE-BASED NURSING
Year Of Publishing 2020
URL https://sigmapubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/wvn.12414?casa_token=2oodflwcdEoAAAAA%3AMX8zmgWVIhMeUa0xc8X3kEkSLKI1jz6TFXhlh0rUoHtcI-AeUKIwFYdQm5qg_-TVTCpDlcXL-aUYQxwS
Keywords Abstract / summary
Nursing
Problem(s) Errors in systematic review abstracts or plain language summaries
Number of systematic reviews included 81
Summary of Findings Full access to this paper is behind a paywall. Of 81 included systematic reviews of nursing indexed on PubMed, about half reported eligibility criteria, information sources, and description of the effect as recommended in the abstract (PRISMA-A). Registration status was reported only in 4.9%.
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? No