• Juan Ruano, Francisco Gómez-García, Jesús Gay-Mimbrera, Macarena Aguilar-Luque, José Luis Fernández-Rueda, Jesús Fernández-Chaichio, Patricia Alcalde-Mellado, Pedro J Carmona-Fernandez, Juan Luis Sanz-Cabanillas, Isabel Viguera-Guerra, Francisco Franco-García, Manuel Cárdenas-Aranzana, José Luis Hernández Romero, Marcelino Gonzalez-Padilla, Beatriz Isla-Tejera, and Antonio Velez Garcia-Nieto.
• Department of Dermatology, Reina Sofía University Hospital, Menendez Pidal Ave, 14004, Córdoba, Spain. juanruanoruiz@mac.com.
• Syst Rev. 2018 Mar 9; 7 (1): 43.

BackgroundEpidemiology and the reporting characteristics of systematic reviews (SRs) and meta-analyses (MAs) are well known. However, no study has analyzed the influence of protocol features on the probability that a study's results will be finally reported, thereby indirectly assessing the reporting bias of International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) registration records.ObjectiveThe objective of this study is to explore which factors are associated with a higher probability that results derived from a non-Cochrane PROSPERO registration record for a systematic review will be finally reported as an original article in a scientific journal.Methods/DesignThe PROSPERO repository will be web scraped to automatically and iteratively obtain all completed non-Cochrane registration records stored from February 2011 to December 2017. Downloaded records will be screened, and those with less than 90% fulfilled or are duplicated (i.e., those sharing titles and reviewers) will be excluded. Manual and human-supervised automatic methods will be used for data extraction, depending on the data source (fields of PROSPERO registration records, bibliometric databases, etc.). Records will be classified into published, discontinued, and abandoned review subgroups. All articles derived from published reviews will be obtained through multiple parallel searches using the full protocol "title" and/or "list reviewers" in MEDLINE/PubMed databases and Google Scholar. Reviewer, author, article, and journal metadata will be obtained using different sources. R and Python programming and analysis languages will be used to describe the datasets; perform text mining, machine learning, and deep learning analyses; and visualize the data. We will report the study according to the recommendations for meta-epidemiological studies adapted from the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement for SRs and MAs.DiscussionThis meta-epidemiological study will explore, for the first time, characteristics of PROSPERO records that may be associated with the publication of a completed systematic review. The evidence may help to improve review workflow performance in terms of research topic selection, decision-making regarding team selection, planning relationships with funding sources, implementing literature search strategies, and efficient data extraction and analysis. We expect to make our results, datasets, and R and Python code scripts publicly available during the third quarter of 2018.

13 keywords...

hide…