Protocol registration issues of systematic review and meta-analysis studies: a survey of global researchers
- PDF / 711,772 Bytes
- 9 Pages / 595.276 x 790.866 pts Page_size
- 94 Downloads / 161 Views
(2020) 20:213
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Open Access
Protocol registration issues of systematic review and meta-analysis studies: a survey of global researchers Gehad Mohamed Tawfik1,2† , Hoang Thi Nam Giang2,3† , Sherief Ghozy2,4 , Ahmed M. Altibi2,5 , Hend Kandil2,6 , Huu-Hoai Le2,7 , Peter Samuel Eid1,2 , Ibrahim Radwan1,2 , Omar Mohamed Makram2,8 , Tong Thi Thu Hien2,9 , Mahmoud Sherif2,10 , As-Saba Hossain2,11 , Tai Luu Lam Thang2,12 , Livia Puljak13 , Hosni Salem14 , Tarek Numair15 , Kazuhiko Moji15 and Nguyen Tien Huy15,16*
Abstract Background: Although protocol registration of systematic reviews/meta-analysis (SR/MA) is still not mandatory, it is highly recommended that authors publish their SR/MA protocols prior to submitting their manuscripts for publication as recommended by the Cochrane guidelines for conducting SR/MAs. our aim was to assess the awareness, obstacles, and opinions of SR/MA authors about the protocol registration process. Methods: A cross-sectional survey study included the authors who published SR/MAs during the period from 2010 to 2016, and they were contacted for participation in our survey study. They were identified through the literature search of SR/MAs in Scopus database. An online questionnaire was sent to each participant via e-mail after receiving their approval to join the study. We have sent 6650 emails and received 275 responses. Results: A total of 270 authors responses were complete and included in the final analysis. Our results has shown that PROSPERO was the most common database used for protocol registration (71.3%). The registration-to-acceptance time interval in PROSPERO was less than 1 month (99.1%). Almost half of the authors (44.2%) did not register their protocols prior to publishing their SR/MAs and according to their opinion that the other authors lack knowledge of protocol importance and mandance to be registered, was the most commonly reported reason (44.9%). A significant percenatge of respondents (37.4%) believed that people would steal their ideas from protocol databases, while only 5.3% reported that their SR/MA had been stolen. However, the majority (72.9%) of participants have agreed that protocol registries play a role in preventing unnecessary duplication of reviews. Finally, 37.4% of participants agree that SR/MA protocol registration should be mandatory. (Continued on next page)
* Correspondence: [email protected] † Gehad Mohamed Tawfik and Hoang Thi Nam Giang contributed equally to this work. 15 School of Tropical Medicine and Global Health, Nagasaki University, Nagasaki 852-8523, Japan 16 Institute of Research and Development, Duy Tan University, Da Nang 550000, Vietnam Full list of author information is available at the end of the article © The Author(s). 2020 Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a li
Data Loading...
