Has the Reporting Quality of Systematic Review Abstracts in Nursing Improved Since the Release of PRISMA for Abstracts? A Survey of High-Profile Nursing Journals

Background The PRISMA for s (PRISMA-A) was developed to guide authors to present a structured abstract. However, the adherence of abstracts to these guidelines in some areas was of concern. Aims To determine whether the publication of PRISMA-A resulted in an improvement in the abstracts reported with nursing systematic reviews (SRs). Methods This was a cross-sectional study. We searched PubMed for randomized controlled trials-based SRs published in top-tier nursing journals. A PRISMA-A checklist was used to assess abstracts in the SR included. Total score on checklists, comparison of total scores between two periods, and effect factors were analyzed. Results Overall, abstract reporting compliance with PRISMA-A has not improved significantly with the time span. Of the 81 SRs, 74.1% were structured. About half reported eligibility criteria, information sources, and description of the effect as recommended. Registration status was reported only in 4.9%. The reporting quality was significantly higher for journals with higher impact factors (p < .001). Linking Evidence to Action Although not inclusive of all SRs in the nursing field, our sample reflects the general trend that there was no significant improvement in the compliance of SR abstracts reported in nursing with the release of PRISMA-A. There is room for improvement, as most items have not been fully reported.