PRISMA 2009 Flow Diagram – HOW TO

tifi

tio
en

ca
Id

Records identified through Additional records identified

database searching through other sources
(n = ) (n = )

Records after duplicates removed

(n = )
en
Sc
re

in
g

Records screened Records excluded

(n = ) (n = )
gib
ilit
Eli

Full-text articles assessed Full-text articles excluded,

for eligibility with reasons
(n = ) (n = )


Studies included in
qualitative synthesis
(n = )
ud
ed
In
cl

From: Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, The PRISMA Group (2009). Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-
Analyses: The PRISMA Statement. PLoS Med 6(7): e1000097. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed1000097

For more information, visit www.prisma-statement.org.

 This looks great Julie, you are definitely ready to fill in your PRISMA
So to fill this in….
Records identified through database searching - this is your total number of hits (relevant or
otherwise)
Additional records identified through other sources – this is the number of total hits from
reference list searching
Records after duplicates removed - total number after you have gone through and removed all
duplicates (whether they are relevant or not)
Records screened- this number will be the same as the above (Records after duplicates removed).

After this step, this is where you go through the ones you identified as relevant in your literature
table (double check all duplicates have been removed), apply Cohen’s preview, read etc, and
screen for relevant hits.
Whilst it seems like you are backtracking here this is a rechecking phase that is important for
consistency.

You then record your excluded number (so the number you removed that was irrelevant) in the
Records excluded section of the diagram.
This will give you the number for Full-text articles assessed for eligibility

You then, read the full text of the articles you have left, the ‘relevant’ ones.
and screen out any that are deemed irrelevant or unsuitable (they do not meet your criteria
fully). Record your exclusions and the reasons in the Full-text articles excluded, with reasons
section.
This will give you the final set of papers that you will use in your review.

Once you have completed these steps, you are ready to complete the quality assessment. Begin
by dividing the remaining articles into theoretical, qualitative (and mixed methods), and
quantitative.

Theoretical articles will use the Authority, Accuracy, Coverage, Objectivity, Date, Significance
(AACODS) checklist (Tyndall, 2008).
Qualitative will use CASP
Quantitative will use STROBE.

From: Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, The PRISMA Group (2009). Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-
Analyses: The PRISMA Statement. PLoS Med 6(7): e1000097. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed1000097

For more information, visit www.prisma-statement.org.