Author instructions in biomedical journals infrequently address systematic review reporting and methodology: a cross-sectional study

Abstract

ObjectivesWe aimed to analyze how instructions for authors in journals indexed in MEDLINE address systematic review (SR) reporting and methodology. Study Design and SettingWe analyzed instructions for authors in 20% of MEDLINE-indexed journals listed in the online catalog of the National Library of Medicine on July 27, 2021. We extracted data only from the instructions published in English. We extracted data on the existence of instructions for reporting and methodology of SRs. ResultsInstructions from 1,237 journals mentioned SRs in 45% (n = 560) of the cases. Systematic review (SR) registration was mentioned in 104/1,237 (8%) of instructions. Guidelines for reporting SR protocols were found in 155/1,237 (13%) of instructions. Guidelines for reporting SRs were explicitly mentioned in 461/1,237 (37%), whereas the EQUATOR (Enhancing the Quality and Transparency of Health Research) network was referred to in 474/1,237 (38%) of instructions. Less than 2% (n = 20) of instructions mentioned risk of bias and meta-analyses; less than 1% mentioned certainty of evidence assessment, methodological expectations, updating of SRs, overviews of SRs, or scoping reviews. ConclusionJournals indexed in MEDLINE rarely provide instructions for authors regarding SR reporting and methodology. Such instructions could potentially raise authors' awareness and improve how SRs are prepared and reported.