Cited by 38Meta-analysis and systematic reviewsAcademic Publishing and Open AccessResearch Data Management Practices

The international platform of registered systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (INPLASY) at 3 years: an analysis of 4,658 registered protocols on inplasy.com, platform features, and website statistics

Open access
Canellas, João Vitor dos Santos, Ritto, Fabio Gamboa, Rodolico, Alessandro, Aguglia, Eugenio, Fernandes, Gustavo Vicentis de Oliveira, Figueredo, Carlos Marcelo da Silva, Vettore, Mario Vianna·2023·Frontiers in Research Metrics and Analytics

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Background: INPLASY ® is an international platform for registering systematic reviews and meta-analysis protocols that was launched in March 2020. INPLASY ® provides an online database in which the protocols are maintained as permanent public records and can be accessed on its website ( www.inplasy.com ). Methods: We described the database features and registered information of all records published since the launch of the registry on March 31, 2023. Additionally, we analyzed the website statistics dataset to explore user experience and promote data transparency. Results: Four thousand six hundred fifty-eight records were registered in INPLASY ® , and more than 94% of the protocols were published within 24 h. Most of the submissions were from China, followed by Portugal, Taiwan, Malaysia, and Brazil. The INPLASY ® website received 386,395 page views from 64,568 visitors during the first three years. The accesses were obtained from 170 countries. Most of the accesses were from China, followed by the US, the UK, and Portugal. The review status “completed and published” was observed in 898 protocols, and these studies were published in 372 different scientific peer-reviewed journals. The features of INPLASY ® include the following: (i) INPLASY ® identifier, a unique protocol number; (ii) the digital object identifier (DOI) number, the URL of the protocol linked to a specific DOI; (iii) ORCID update, INPLASY ® automatically updates authors' ORCID page, including their protocol; and (iv) search tools, the protocols are freely accessible on www.inplasy.com . Conclusions: INPLASY ® has several practical and useful features that should be considered when planning the registration of a systematic review protocol. Furthermore, the sharp increase in the number of protocols registered in INPLASY ® in the first three years and the database statistics demonstrate that INPLASY ® has become an important source of systematic review protocols. Therefore, authors should access INPLASY ® before planning a future review study to avoid unintended duplication of efforts and to obtain timely registration.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3389/frma.2023.1135853

Cites

12 of 12 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Canellas, J. V. D. S., Ritto, F. G., Rodolico, A., Aguglia, E., Fernandes, G. V. D. O., Figueredo, C. M. D. S., & Vettore, M. V.
Affiliations
  • International Platform of Registered Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Protocols (CH)
  • University of Oklahoma (US)
  • University of Catania (IT)
  • Griffith University (AU)
Corresponding author
Canellas, João Vitor dos Santos
Venue
Frontiers in Research Metrics and Analytics
Published
2023-07-31
Volume
8
Pages
1135853-1135853
ISSN
2504-0537 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4385416024
Cited by
38
References
12
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1
FWCI
2.62
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Frontiers in Research Metrics and Analytics (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Research Square (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Griffith Research Online (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • NORA - Norwegian Open Research Archives (submittedVersion, cc-by)
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
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Research Data Management Practices
Keywords
online databases, research transparency, ORCID, digital object identifiers

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