Home › Research › Cognitive tests and assessment
The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews
Matthew James Page, Joanne E. McKenzie, Patrick M. Bossuyt, Isabelle Boutron, Tammy Hoffmann, Cynthia D. Mulrow, Larissa Shamseer, Jennifer Tetzlaff, Elie A. Akl, Sue Brennan, Roger Chou, Julie Glanville, Jeremy Grimshaw, Asbjørn Hróbjartsson, Manoj Mathew Lalu, Tianjing Li, Elizabeth Loder, Evan Mayo‐Wilson, Steve J McDonald, Luke A. McGuinness, Lesley A. Stewart, James Thomas, Andrea C. Tricco, Vivian Andrea Welch, Penny F. Whiting, David Moher. BMJ, 2021-03-29
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
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.
Why it matters
The PRISMA 2020 statement is an updated guideline for how to report systematic reviews, with a 27-item checklist and revised flow diagrams. It is a reporting guideline, not a dementia study.
How this study scored 64/100
Published in a leading specialty journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on strength of evidence, so that was left out: it earned 61 of the 95 points we could judge it on, which is 64 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 9 / 10 | Tier 2 — leading specialty journal (BMJ) |
| Journal's citation record | 3 / 4 | BMJ: journal h-index 413 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29) |
| Study design | 0 / 12 | No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Strength of evidence | — / 5 | No evidence rating recorded — left out of this score |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 3 / 5 | 2021 — within 6 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 0 / 4 | Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 0 / 3 | Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Randomised / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | 7 / 7 | Cited 105,244 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10) |
| Citations per year | 5 / 5 | 15,034.9 citations a year over 7 year(s) since 2021 |
| Impact for its field and year | 6 / 6 | Cited 436.2× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI) |
| Cited by studies here | 0 / 6 | No other study in this library cites it |
| Still being cited | 4 / 4 | Cited 75,799 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex) |
| Senior author's track record | 4 / 4 | Last-listed author David Moher: h-index 218 (OpenAlex, whole career) |
| Institution's track record | 3 / 3 | Harvard University: institution h-index 3,235 (OpenAlex) |
| Multi-centre collaboration | 3 / 3 | OpenAlex lists 32 institution(s) in 8 countries |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 33782057) |
| Free to read | 2 / 2 | Free to read |
| Points | 61 / 95 | Scored on 19 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 61 of the 95 points we could judge it on is 64 out of 100. |
| Total | 64 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Full text: free to read — OpenAlex lists this copy as free to read: the link above (checked 6 Feb 1020).
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. The record names 26 authors; APA and Vancouver show the first six, BibTeX and the downloads carry all of them. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
APA 7th
Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T., Mulrow, C. D., et al. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71
Vancouver
Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann T, Mulrow CD, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ. 2021. doi:10.1136/bmj.n71. PMID: 33782057.
BibTeX
@article{page2021-33782057,
author = {Page, Matthew James and McKenzie, Joanne E. and Bossuyt, Patrick M. and Boutron, Isabelle and Hoffmann, Tammy and Mulrow, Cynthia D. and Shamseer, Larissa and Tetzlaff, Jennifer and Akl, Elie A. and Brennan, Sue and Chou, Roger and Glanville, Julie and Grimshaw, Jeremy and Hróbjartsson, Asbjørn and Lalu, Manoj Mathew and Li, Tianjing and Loder, Elizabeth and Mayo‐Wilson, Evan and McDonald, Steve J and McGuinness, Luke A. and Stewart, Lesley A. and Thomas, James and Tricco, Andrea C. and Welch, Vivian Andrea and Whiting, Penny F. and Moher, David},
title = {{The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews}},
journal = {BMJ},
year = {2021},
doi = {10.1136/bmj.n71},
pmid = {33782057},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71}
}
Related studies in Cognitive tests and assessment
Also in Cognitive tests and assessment
88 studies in the library are filed under Cognitive tests and assessment with no topic tag they share with another; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed tour of them. The Cognitive tests and assessment hub.