Finally, the SLR is published as a report giving a critical summary of the secondary research. The report follows an IMRaD structure:
Guidelines for reporting systematic reviews can be found at: http://www.equator-network.org/.
The Methods section of an SLR report should include a flow diagram showing how studies were selected.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4046496/figure/F1/ (CC BY).
Stovold E, Beecher D, Foxlee R, Noel-Storr A. Syst Rev. 2014; 3: 54.
Del Rio-Pertuz G, Gutierrez JF, Triana AJ et al. Usefulness of sputum Gram stain for etiologic diagnosis in community-acquired pneumonia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Infect Dis 2019;19:403.
Journals may ask for relevant reporting checklists to be included with a submission. For systematic reviews in general and for meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials, the relevant guidelines are the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines (http://www.equator-network.org/reporting-guidelines/prisma/).
For meta-analyses of data from observational studies, the Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) guidelines should be used (https://www.equator-network.org/reporting-guidelines/meta-analysis-of-observational-studies-in-epidemiology-a-proposal-for-reporting-meta-analysis-of-observational-studies-in-epidemiology-moose-group/).
There are PRISMA guideline extensions or versions for special systematic analyses, such as network meta-analyses (http://www.equator-network.org/reporting-guidelines/prisma-extension-network-meta-analyses/) and diagnostic test accuracy studies (PRISMA-DTA, http://www.equator-network.org/reporting-guidelines/prisma-dta/).
Although scoping reviews are not strictly systematic reviews, they share many characteristics with systematic reviews and also have an associated PRISMA extension (PRISMA-ScR, www.equator-network.org/reporting-guidelines/prisma-scr/).