Research Guides: Evidence Syntheses and Systematic Reviews: Protocols

Protocols

Protocols are detailed plans or blueprints that outline the methods and procedures to be followed during the conduct of evidence syntheses, and are an essential part of the process in systematic reviews. They serve as a predefined roadmap for the study and are developed before starting the actual data collection and analysis. They describe the rationale, hypothesis, and planned methods of systematic reviews.

Detailed protocols should be made publicly available and registered (maintained as a permanent record) in protocol registries such as Campbell Collaboration, Cochrane, PROSPERO, and Open Science. This helps to avoid duplication and to enable the comparing of other review methods that have been reported, with the research plan in the protocol.

They help with improving transparency and reproducibility, and with preventing bias in the review process. They are used as a guide by the research team when conducting the research.

Protocols should generally include the following information:

Research question in detail (PICO (Patient/population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes), study design, setting, time frame) (this is the best point in the project to prevent "mission creep")
Rationale for the systematic review
Team members and their roles
Project timeline
Anticipated search terms, search strategies, and databases
Information sources to search
Frequency and means of communication between study team members (recommend regular intervals rather than after completion of phases to avoid the worst stalling of the project)
Inclusion/exclusion criteria for studies
Method for resolving disagreements (e.g. on studies to be included)
Process for addressing shifts in study team membership, including time commitment shifts
Dissemination strategy: target conferences/journals

Protocol Registries

Protocol registries were developed in response to a growing number of systematic reviews being written; they are supposed to prevent duplication of systematic reviews being conducted.

Campbell Collaboration:
An international social science network that produces high quality, high standards, open, and policy-relevant evidence syntheses and policy briefs. Used in Education & Social Sciences
Cochrane:
An international non-profit organization that "summarizes the best evidence from research to help you make informed choices about treatment..." Used in healthcare and Medical Sciences
Prospero:
The largest, independent, international database that "aims to provide a comprehensive listing of systematic reviews registered..." Used in health and social care, welfare, public health, education, justice, etc., where there is a health-related outcome.
Open Science Framework:
An open source, multidisciplinary web application, that can be used to pre-register a systematic review protocol, among other things. Authors do not submit their protocols for review by an editorial board here, before they are accepted and pre-registered. Researchers can pre-register themselves.

Standards

Standards are the generally accepted best practices and guidelines that should be followed when conducting a systematic review. These standards are established to ensure the quality and rigor of the review process, minimize bias, and enhance the transparency and reproducibility of the research.

There are Protocol Standards and Reporting Standards:

Protocol Standards refer to the Standards used before reviews are conducted.

PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses PROTOCOLS)
Provides guidance for authors to report the details of their systematic review protocol before conducting the actual review. This includes a checklist guiding authors on how to describe the key elements of the protocol, such as the research question, eligibility criteria, search strategy, data extraction, etc. It concentrates on the reporting of the plan and methods for conducting the systematic review.

Reporting Standards report the results of completed reviews.

PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses)
one of the most commonly known. It provides a set of guidelines for reporting evidence in systematic reviews and meta-analyses, including a structured checklist and flowchart to help authors transparently report the methods, findings, and conclusions of their systematic review.
Equator Network
an international initiative that seeks to improve the reliability and value of published health research literature by promoting transparent and accurate reporting and wider use of robust reporting guidelines.