Registration in the international prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO) of systematic review protocols was associated with increased review quality
Open accessAbstract
Objectives A priori registration of systematic review protocols in international prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO) can help reduce selective reporting of outcomes. The aim of this study was to assess the association between registration of orthodontic systematic reviews in PROSPERO and review quality with the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) tool. Study design and setting Seven databases were searched for systematic reviews with/without meta-analysis in orthodontics published between 2012 and 2016. After duplicate study selection and data extraction, the quality of identified reviews was assessed in duplicate with the AMSTAR tool. Descriptive statistics of medians and interquartile ranges (IQRs) and chi-square/Fisher exact tests were calculated. Univariable/multivariable linear regression modeling was implemented to assess the effect of review registration on %AMSTAR score at α of 5%. Results A total of 182 orthodontic systematic reviews were identified, 37 (20.3%) of which were registered. Considerable differences were seen in AMSTAR between registered (median = 86.4%; IQR = 77.3-95.5%) and nonregistered reviews (median = 72.7%; IQR = 59.1-81.8%). After adjustment, registration in PROSPERO was associated with an average increase in %AMSTAR score of 6.6% (95% confidence interval = 1.0-12.3%). Conclusion Although only a small percentage of orthodontic systematic reviews was registered a priori in PROSPERO, registered reviews were of higher quality than nonregistered reviews.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
A priori registration of SR protocols could boost transparency, minimize outcome reporting bias, and reduce improper spending of research funds due overlaps between SRs.
“Registered reviews offer better quality and conduct and reporting completeness compared to non-registered ones, and a priori registration of SR protocols could boost transparency, minimize outcome reporting bias, and reduce improper spending of research funds due overlaps between SRs [32–34].”
From Reporting quality of abstracts of systematic reviews/meta-analyses: An appraisal of Arab Journal of Urology across 12 years: the PRISMA-Abstracts checklist (2023) · cites this paper as [32]
Registered reviews offer better quality and conduct and reporting completeness compared to non-registered ones.
“Registered reviews offer better quality and conduct and reporting completeness compared to non-registered ones, and a priori registration of SR protocols could boost transparency, minimize outcome reporting bias, and reduce improper spending of research funds due overlaps between SRs [32–34].”
From Reporting quality of abstracts of systematic reviews/meta-analyses: An appraisal of Arab Journal of Urology across 12 years: the PRISMA-Abstracts checklist (2023) · cites this paper as [32]
Cites
Shea, B. J., Reeves, B. C., Wells, G., Thuku, M., Hamel, C., Moran, J., Moher, D., Tugwell, P., Welch, V., Kristjansson, E., et al. (2017) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.j4008 · Cited by 10,636 · see citing works
Liberati, A., Altman, D. G., Tetzlaff, J., Mulrow, C., Gøtzsche, P. C., Ioannidis, J. P. A., Clarke, M., Devereaux, P. J., Kleijnen, J., & Moher, D. (2009) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.06.006 · Cited by 10,578 · see citing works
Simulation Study of Confounder-Selection Strategies
Maldonado, G., & Greenland, S. (1993) · American Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a116813 · Cited by 2,491 · see citing works
ROBIS: A new tool to assess risk of bias in systematic reviews was developed
Whiting, P., Savović, J., Higgins, J. P. T., Caldwell, D. M., Reeves, B. C., Shea, B., Davies, P., Kleijnen, J., & Churchill, R. (2016) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2015.06.005 · Cited by 2,272 · see citing works
Chan, A.-W., Hróbjartsson, A., Haahr, M. T., Gøtzsche, P. C., & Altman, D. G. (2004) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.291.20.2457 · Cited by 1,845 · see citing works
The nuts and bolts of PROSPERO: an international prospective register of systematic reviews
Booth, A., Clarke, M., Dooley, G., Ghersi, D., Moher, D., Petticrew, M., & Stewart, L. (2012) · Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1186/2046-4053-1-2 · Cited by 1,433 · see citing works
External Validation of a Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR)
Shea, B. J., Bouter, L. M., Peterson, J., Boers, M., Andersson, N., Ortiz, Z., Ramsay, T., Bai, A., Shukla, V. K., & Grimshaw, J. M. (2007) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0001350 · Cited by 569 · see citing works
Neelapu, B. C., Kharbanda, O. P., Sardana, H. K., Balachandran, R., Sardana, V., Kapoor, P., Gupta, A., & Vasamsetti, S. (2017) · Sleep Medicine Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.smrv.2016.01.007 · Cited by 429 · see citing works
Armijo-Olivo, S., Pitance, L., Singh, V., Neto, F., Thie, N., & Michelotti, A. (2016) · Physical Therapy · doi:10.2522/ptj.20140548 · Cited by 413 · see citing works
Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Kirkham, J., Dwan, K., Kramer, S., Green, S., & Forbes, A. (2014) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.mr000035.pub2 · Cited by 281 · see citing works
Miles, P. G., Vig, P. S., Weyant, R. J., Forrest, T. D., & Rockette, H. E. (1996) · American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics · doi:10.1016/s0889-5406(96)70177-4 · Cited by 237 · see citing works
Association between periodontitis and arterial hypertension: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Martin-Cabezas, R., Seelam, N., Petit, C., Agossa, K., Gaertner, S., Tenenbaum, H., Davideau, J.-L., & Huck, O. (2016) · American Heart Journal · doi:10.1016/j.ahj.2016.07.018 · Cited by 183 · see citing works
Nieuwenhuijsen, M. J., Martinez, D., Grellier, J., Bennett, J., Best, N., Iszatt, N., Vrijheid, M., & Toledano, M. B. (2009) · Environmental Health Perspectives · doi:10.1289/ehp.0900677 · Cited by 175 · see citing works
Orlandi, M., Suvan, J., Petrie, A., Donos, N., Masi, S., Hingorani, A., Deanfield, J., & D’Aiuto, F. (2014) · Atherosclerosis · doi:10.1016/j.atherosclerosis.2014.06.002 · Cited by 164 · see citing works
Bias Due to Changes in Specified Outcomes during the Systematic Review Process
Kirkham, J. J., Altman, D. G., & Williamson, P. R. (2010) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0009810 · Cited by 164 · see citing works
Perinetti, G., Primožič, J., Franchi, L., & Contardo, L. (2015) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0141198 · Cited by 138 · see citing works
How to reduce unnecessary duplication: use <scp>PROSPERO</scp>
Moher, D., Booth, A., & Stewart, L. (2014) · BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology · doi:10.1111/1471-0528.12657 · Cited by 113 · see citing works
Pandis, N., Shamseer, L., Kokich, V. G., Fleming, P. S., & Moher, D. (2014) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.04.001 · Cited by 92 · see citing works
Nazarali, N., Altalibi, M., Nazarali, S., Major, M. P., Flores-Mir, C., & Major, P. W. (2015) · The European Journal of Orthodontics · doi:10.1093/ejo/cju101 · Cited by 62 · see citing works
Arnold, S., Koletsi, D., Patcas, R., & Eliades, T. (2016) · Journal of Dentistry · doi:10.1016/j.jdent.2016.08.006 · Cited by 42 · see citing works
Self-citationPandis, N., Fleming, P. S., Worthington, H., Dwan, K., & Salanti, G. (2015) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0137667 · Cited by 30 · cited 2× · see citing works
“Likewise, a comparison between a priori protocols of systematic reviews and the subsequent published reports found considerable discrepancies between them, which increased the likelihood of reporting statistically significant outcomes [6-9].”
MethodResult
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
PROSPERO: An International Register of Systematic Review Protocols
Schiavo, J. H. (2019) · Medical Reference Services Quarterly · doi:10.1080/02763869.2019.1588072 · Cited by 643 · see citing works
Abbott, R., Bethel, A., Rogers, M., Whear, R., Orr, N., Shaw, L., Stein, K., & Thompson Coon, J. (2022) · BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine · doi:10.1136/bmjebm-2021-111710 · Cited by 56 · see citing works
Protocol registration improves reporting quality of systematic reviews in dentistry
dos Santos, M. B. F., Agostini, B. A., Bassani, R., Pereira, G. K. R., & Sarkis-Onofre, R. (2020) · BMC Medical Research Methodology · doi:10.1186/s12874-020-00939-7 · Cited by 61 · see citing works
Shah, A., Jones, M. P., & Holtmann, G. J. (2020) · Indian Journal of Gastroenterology · doi:10.1007/s12664-020-01107-x · Cited by 39 · see citing works
Kalayci, A., Januzzi, J. L., Mitsunami, M., Tanboga, I. H., Karabay, C. Y., & Gibson, C. M. (2025) · European Heart Journal - Cardiovascular Pharmacotherapy · doi:10.1093/ehjcvp/pvaf037 · Cited by 18 · see citing works
Endorsement of open science practices by dental journals: A meta-research study
Santos, W. V. D. O., Dotto, L., Ferreira, T. D. G. M., & Sarkis-Onofre, R. (2024) · Journal of Dentistry · doi:10.1016/j.jdent.2024.104869 · Cited by 8 · see citing works
El Ansari, W., AlRumaihi, K., El-Ansari, K., Arafa, M., Elbardisi, H., Majzoub, A., Shamsodini, A., & Al Ansari, A. (2023) · Arab Journal of Urology · doi:10.1080/2090598x.2022.2113127 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
Predictors of Higher Quality of Systematic Reviews Addressing Nutrition and Cancer Prevention
Storman, D., Koperny, M., Zając, J., Polak, M., Weglarz, P., Bochenek-Cibor, J., Swierz, M. J., Staskiewicz, W., Gorecka, M., Skuza, A., et al. (2022) · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · doi:10.3390/ijerph19010506 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
Breivik, E., Ervik, B., & Kitzmüller, G. (2024) · BMC Health Services Research · doi:10.1186/s12913-024-11875-3 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
- Authors
- Sideri, S., Papageorgiou, S. N., & Eliades, T.
- Affiliations
- King's College London (GB)
- University of Zurich (CH)
- Corresponding author
- Papageorgiou, Spyridon N.
- Venue
- Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2018-08
- Volume
- 100
- Pages
- 103-110
- ISSN
- 0895-4356 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2783472197
- Cited by
- 388
- References
- 21
- Citations by year
- 2026: 36 · 2025: 54 · 2024: 75 · 2023: 49 · 2022: 42 · 2021: 54 · 2020: 35 · 2019: 32 · 2018: 9
- FWCI
- 6.47
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.zora.uzh.ch
- Licence
- cc-by-nc-nd
- www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
- Locations
- Journal of Clinical Epidemiology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich) (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Academic Publishing and Open Access
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Clinical practice guidelines implementation
- Keywords
- Prospero, orthodontics, review quality, AMSTAR, selective reporting, reporting bias, meta-analysis
- MeSH terms
- Systematic Reviews as Topic, Humans, Orthodontics, Prospective Studies, Registries, Research Design, Databases, Bibliographic
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
