The PLoS Medicine editorial this month focuses on initiatives ensuring best practice in the conduct and reporting of systematic reviews. This editorial announces key changes in journal policy towards this type of article; the PLoS Medicine editors will now ask authors whether their systematic review was registered during the planning stage (a practice we support, as helping to reduce bias in carrying out and reporting the systematic review). We will also ask authors whether they had a protocol for the review, and if so ask to see a copy to help in editorial and peer-review assessment of the submitted article. Although such policies have existed for some time for clinical trials, it is only now that an international registry exists that is available to all researchers carrying out systematic reviews – the PROSPERO registry. As this is still a comparatively recent initiative, we are very keen to hear researchers’ reactions regarding their experiences of registering systematic reviews and the change in policy.
- Social pathways for Ebola Virus Disease in rural Sierra Leone, and some implications for containment
- A Rapid Response to Ebola
- Researchers Follow the Path of HIV and Prevention Interventions
- Urbanisation Up Close
- Ebola has Taught us a Crucial Lesson about our Views of “Irrational” Health Behaviors
- The Price of Joining the ‘Middle Income Country’ Club: Reduced Access to Medical Innovation
TopicsAfrica antimicrobial drugs antiretroviral treatment cardiovascular health child health china clinical trials developing world diarrhea environment ethics Ghostwriting global burden of disease global health guidelines health costs health information health policy health systems HIV HIV/AIDS influenza LMICs malaria maternal and perinatal health maternal health medical literature medical students Mental Health mortality MSF neglected tropical diseases open access pharmaceutical industry Policy public health reporting research ethics sanitation sub-saharan Africa systematic reviews tuberculosis vaccine water WHO