Secondary Logo

Journal Logo

Letters

PRISMA Statement

Takkouche, Bahi; Norman, Guy

Author Information
doi: 10.1097/EDE.0b013e3181fe7999
  • Free

The authors respond:

We thank the authors1 for their interesting comments in defense of their proposed guidelines. However, we judge their remarks to be about semantics, not substance. The authors themselves have previously stated that PRISMA advocates protocol registration.2 In our view, the main issue is not whether PRISMA “demands,” “advocates,” or “requests” registration. If the guideline was adopted as standard by journal editors, the “request” would of course become a requirement, and the real question is whether this requirement makes sense. Our view, as detailed in our original commentary,3 is that it does not: this additional layer of academic bureaucracy would merely obstruct free scientific enquiry.

Bahi Takkouche

Department of Preventive Medicine

University of Santiago de Compostela

Santiago de Compostela, Spain

CIBER en Epidemiología y Salud Pública (CIBER-ESP)

Spain

[email protected]

Guy Norman

Robens Centre for Public and Environmental Health

Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences

University of Surrey

Surrey, United Kingdom

REFERENCES

1. Moher D, Altman DG, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J. PRISMA statement. Epidemiology. 2010;22:128.
2. Booth A, Clarke M, Ghersi D, Moher D, Petticrew M, Stewart L. An international registry of systematic-review protocols. Lancet. 2010 Jul 12. [Epub ahead of print].
3. Takkouche B, Norman G. Meta-analysis protocol registration: sed quis custodiet ipsos custodes? [but who will guard the guardians?] [commentary]. Epidemiology. 2010;21:614–615.
© 2011 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Inc.