Abstract:Background and aims: The Quality of Reporting of Meta-analyses (QUOROM) conference was convened to address standards for improving the QUOROM of clinical randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The Structure of articles based on scientific standards is one of factors that affects. The QUOROM statement for reporting SR was created according to evidence and is a comprehensive set of guidelines. Development of the QUOROM statement in 1996 which was expected to set some standards in drafting of meta-analysis of RCTs. In 2009, the QUORUM Statement was replaced by the PRISMA Statement (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses) to also apply to SRs. Methods: We searched the data base in Cochrane, Medline, Google Scholar, PubMed, Iranmedex, SID, IranDoc, Magiran for 2000 to 2016 with keywords quality assessment, systematic review, meta-analysis, quarom and obtained: The checklist consists of 18 items, including 8 evidence based ones, addressing primarily the Abstract, Introduction, Methods, and Results section of a report of a SR of RCTs. This checklist encourages authors to provide readers with information regarding searches, selection, validity assessment, data abstraction, study characteristics, quantitative data synthesis, and trial flow. Items reported in the QUOROM statement that are to be included in a SR report were chosen based on evidence whenever possible, which implies the need to include items that can systematically influence estimates of treatment effects. Results: Beverley Shea & et al (2000) compared the QUOROM statement to other tools and Found The majority of checklists contained items about what the method section of a SR should include and generally neglected the other components of the report: only one (5%)checklist included an item regarding the title and two (10%) addressed the abstract. The Abstract items in the QUOROM checklist were the least frequently encountered among the checklists (0–9%). Thirteen (62%) included an item about the introduction. There was considerable overlap between the content of the QUOROM checklist and the method section of the other checklists. All but two checklists (90%) asked about the searching and all but one (95%) asked about the selection criteria. Sixteen (76%) included an item on validity and twelve (57%) asked about data abstraction. Items about data synthesis were definitely present in 13 checklists (62%). However, while quantitative data synthesis was clearly identified as a prerequisite in 13 (62%) of the checklists and may possibly have been required in three others, only nine (43%) of them (and possibly four others) included a question on the individual study characteristics in the methods section. In 2009, the QUORUM Statement was replaced by the PRISMA Statement to also apply to SRs. Today, a use of PRISMA Statement isn't enough in the studies. Conclusion: Clearly, research is required to help improve the QUOROM. Such evidence may also act as a catalyst for improving the methods by which meta-analyses are conducted. RCTs and meta-analysis aren't presented in high quality reports. Therefore, training courses about qualitative reporting of RCT results seem necessary for medical researchers. In addition, editors of medical journals must provide necessary reporting guidelines for authors and reviewers to improve the quality of published researches.

Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement

Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015: elaboration and explanation

The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Studies That Evaluate Health Care Interventions: Explanation and Elaboration

PRISMA-S: an extension to the PRISMA statement for reporting literature searches in systematic reviews

PRISMA 2020 explanation and elaboration: updated guidance and exemplars for reporting systematic reviews

The PRISMA Extension Statement for Reporting of Systematic Reviews Incorporating Network Meta-analyses of Health Care Interventions: Checklist and Explanations

Guideline for reporting systematic reviews of outcome measurement instruments (OMIs): PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024

Implementing the 27 PRISMA 2020 Statement items for systematic reviews in the sport and exercise medicine, musculoskeletal rehabilitation and sports science fields: the PERSiST (implementing Prisma in Exercise, Rehabilitation, Sport medicine and SporTs science) guidance

The PRISMA extension statement for reporting of systematic reviews incorporating network meta-analyses of health care interventions：checklist and explanations

Reporting guideline for overviews of reviews of healthcare interventions: development of the PRIOR statement

An Introduction of Preferred Reporting Items for a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Individual Participant Data

From Quorom To Prisma: A Survey Of High-Impact Medical Journals' Instructions To Authors And A Review Of Systematic Reviews In Anesthesia Literature

The PRISMATIC project: protocol for a research programme on novel methods to improve reporting and peer review of systematic reviews of health evidence

Preferred Reporting Items for Overviews of Reviews (PRIOR): a protocol for development of a reporting guideline for overviews of reviews of healthcare interventions

[Introduction to PRISMA-CI Extension Statement and Checklist Systematic Reviews on Complex Interventions].

Characteristics and completeness of reporting of systematic reviews of prevalence studies in adult populations: a meta-research study.

Systematic Evaluation of the Patient-Reported Outcome (PRO) Content of Clinical Trial Protocols

153: A META-ANALYSIS ASSESSING THE QUALITY OF PUBLISHED ARTICLES BASED ON THE CHECKLIST QUOROM

SPIRIT-PRO Extension explanation and elaboration: guidelines for inclusion of patient-reported outcomes in protocols of clinical trials

An Introduction to a Series of PRISMA Statement for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Reminding Peer Reviewers of Reporting Guideline Items to Improve Completeness in Published Articles: Primary Results of 2 Randomized Trials