LA
Unclaimed author profile

Larissa Shamseer

· University of Ottawa

Is this your research profile?

Create or sign in to your KnowledgeTrend account to claim this page. After the claim, this same profile URL and its linked publications will belong to your account. Claiming does not automatically grant a verified badge.

Create account and claim this profile Sign in to claim
2Linked publications
0Citations
0h-index
0i10-index

Metrics are calculated from publications currently linked to this profile.

Researcher overview

About

Larissa Shamseer is a registered researcher in their academic field.

Research output

Recent Publications

2 research works linked to this profile

▤
Meta-analysis and systematic reviews, Traumatic Brain Injury Research, Delphi Technique in Research · 2021 · BMJ

The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews

The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, published in 2009, was designed to help systematic reviewers transparently report why the review was done, what the authors did, and what they found. Over the past decade, advances in systematic review methodology and terminology have necessitated an update to the guideline. The PRISMA 2020 statement replaces the 2009 statement and includes new reporting guidance that reflects advances in methods to identify, select, appraise, and synthesise studies. The structure and presentation of the items have been modified to facilitate implementation. In this article, we present the PRISMA 2020 27-item checklist, an expanded checklist that details reporting recommendations for each item, the PRISMA 2020 abstract checklist, and the revised flow diagrams for original and updated reviews.

▤
Meta-analysis and systematic reviews, Delphi Technique in Research, Traumatic Brain Injury Research · 2015 · Systematic Reviews

Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement

Systematic reviews should build on a protocol that describes the rationale, hypothesis, and planned methods of the review; few reviews report whether a protocol exists. Detailed, well-described protocols can facilitate the understanding and appraisal of the review methods, as well as the detection of modifications to methods and selective reporting in completed reviews. We describe the development of a reporting guideline, the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses for Protocols 2015 (PRISMA-P 2015). PRISMA-P consists of a 17-item checklist intended to facilitate the preparation and reporting of a robust protocol for the systematic review. Funders and those commissioning reviews might consider mandating the use of the checklist to facilitate the submission of relevant protocol information in funding applications. Similarly, peer reviewers and editors can use the guidance to gauge the completeness and transparency of a systematic review protocol submitted for publication in a journal or other medium.