# Systematic reviews and PRISMA: a practical workflow

Decision workbook and teaching example · 2026-10-06

The completed case is fictional. Its values and decisions are not actual findings; complete your project using relevant permissions, methods and requirements.

- Project: ____________________
- Researcher and role: ____________________
- Date and version: ____________________
- Data seen before the decision: ____________________
- Aim and scope: ____________________

## Completed example

| Stage/decision | Example | Check or action |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Protocol | Question and eligibility before search | Are changes dated? |
| Search | Full query, interface and date | Can a colleague repeat it? |
| Screening | 100 illustrative records | Are disagreements and exclusions logged? |
| Extraction | Study ID and linked reports | Is double counting avoided? |
| Synthesis | Method suited to heterogeneity | Are bias and limits reflected? |

## Complete your own record

| Topic | Actual decision and reason | Evidence link and status |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Protocol | __________ | __________ |
| Search | __________ | __________ |
| Screening | __________ | __________ |
| Extraction | __________ | __________ |
| Synthesis | __________ | __________ |

## Completion checks

- [ ] Deliver the protocol, search log, reconciled flow and extraction table.

## Changes and limitations

| Date | Change | Data known at decision time | Reason | Consequence for claim | Reviewer |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| __________ | __________ | __________ | __________ | __________ | __________ |

## Sources and further reading

- [PRISMA 2020 — Statement and checklists](https://www.prisma-statement.org/prisma-2020)
- [National Library of Medicine — PubMed User Guide](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/help/)
- [CASP — Critical appraisal checklists](https://casp-uk.net/casp-tools-checklists/)

Related guide: https://didgar-research-site1.vercel.app/en/guides/systematic-review/