PRISMA 2020 Checklist

Location
Section and Item
Checklist item where item
Topic #
is reported
TITLE
Title 1 Identify the report as a systematic review. si, titulo
ABSTRACT
Abstract 2 See the PRISMA 2020 for Abstracts checklist. si, abstract
INTRODUCTION
Rationale 3 Describe the rationale for the review in the context of existing knowledge. si, introducción
Objectives 4 Provide an explicit statement of the objective(s) or question(s) the review addresses. si, abstract
METHODS
Eligibility criteria 5 Specify the inclusion and exclusion criteria for the review and how studies were grouped for the syntheses. si, Eligibility Criteria
Information 6 Specify all databases, registers, websites, organisations, reference lists and other sources searched or consulted to identify studies. Specify the si, Selection of
sources date when each source was last searched or consulted. Eligible Studies
Search strategy 7 Present the full search strategies for all databases, registers and websites, including any filters and limits used. si, Data Extraction
Selection process 8 Specify the methods used to decide whether a study met the inclusion criteria of the review, including how many reviewers screened each record si, Eligibility
and each report retrieved, whether they worked independently, and if applicable, details of automation tools used in the process. Criteria
Data collection 9 Specify the methods used to collect data from reports, including how many reviewers collected data from each report, whether they worked
si, Eligibility
process independently, any processes for obtaining or confirming data from study investigators, and if applicable, details of automation tools used in the
process. Criteria
Data items 10a List and define all outcomes for which data were sought. Specify whether all results that were compatible with each outcome domain in each si, Eligibility
study were sought (e.g. for all measures, time points, analyses), and if not, the methods used to decide which results to collect. Criteria
10b List and define all other variables for which data were sought (e.g. participant and intervention characteristics, funding sources). Describe any si, Eligibility
assumptions made about any missing or unclear information. Criteria
Study risk of bias 11 Specify the methods used to assess risk of bias in the included studies, including details of the tool(s) used, how many reviewers assessed each
si, Cancer-Specific Mortality, Risk of Bias and
assessment study and whether they worked independently, and if applicable, details of automation tools used in the process. Certainty of the Evidence Assessments
Effect measures 12 Specify for each outcome the effect measure(s) (e.g. risk ratio, mean difference) used in the synthesis or presentation of results.
Synthesis 13a Describe the processes used to decide which studies were eligible for each synthesis (e.g. tabulating the study intervention characteristics and
methods comparing against the planned groups for each synthesis (item #5)). si, Results

13b Describe any methods required to prepare the data for presentation or synthesis, such as handling of missing summary statistics, or data si, Results
conversions.
13c Describe any methods used to tabulate or visually display results of individual studies and syntheses. si, Results
13d Describe any methods used to synthesize results and provide a rationale for the choice(s). If meta-analysis was performed, describe the
model(s), method(s) to identify the presence and extent of statistical heterogeneity, and software package(s) used. si, Results
13e Describe any methods used to explore possible causes of heterogeneity among study results (e.g. subgroup analysis, meta-regression). si, Results
13f Describe any sensitivity analyses conducted to assess robustness of the synthesized results. si, Results
Reporting bias 14 Describe any methods used to assess risk of bias due to missing results in a synthesis (arising from reporting biases). si, Cancer-Specific Mortality, Risk of Bias and
assessment Certainty of the Evidence Assessments

Certainty 15 Describe any methods used to assess certainty (or confidence) in the body of evidence for an outcome. si, Cancer-Specific Mortality, Risk of Bias and
assessment Certainty of the Evidence Assessments
PRISMA 2020 Checklist

Location
Section and Item
Checklist item where item
Topic #
is reported
RESULTS
Study selection 16a Describe the results of the search and selection process, from the number of records identified in the search to the number of studies included in
si, Results
the review, ideally using a flow diagram.
16b Cite studies that might appear to meet the inclusion criteria, but which were excluded, and explain why they were excluded. si, Eligibility Criteria
Study 17 Cite each included study and present its characteristics.
characteristics si, Results

Risk of bias in 18 Present assessments of risk of bias for each included study. si, Risk of Bias and Certainty of the
studies Evidence Assessments
Results of 19 For all outcomes, present, for each study: (a) summary statistics for each group (where appropriate) and (b) an effect estimatesi,
and its of
Risk precision
Bias and Certainty of the
individual studies (e.g. confidence/credible interval), ideally using structured tables or plots. Evidence Assessments
Results of 20a For each synthesis, briefly summarise the characteristics and risk of bias among contributing studies. si, Risk of Bias and Certainty of the Evidence Assessments
syntheses si, precision
Risk of Bias and Certainty of the
20b Present results of all statistical syntheses conducted. If meta-analysis was done, present for each the summary estimate and its (e.g.
Evidence Assessments
confidence/credible interval) and measures of statistical heterogeneity. If comparing groups, describe the direction of the effect.
20c Present results of all investigations of possible causes of heterogeneity among study results. si, Risk of Bias and Certainty of the Evidence Assessments
20d Present results of all sensitivity analyses conducted to assess the robustness of the synthesized results. si, Risk of Bias and Certainty of the Evidence Assessments
Reporting biases 21 Present assessments of risk of bias due to missing results (arising from reporting biases) for each synthesis assessed. si, Risk of Bias and Certainty of the Evidence
Assessments
Certainty of 22 Present assessments of certainty (or confidence) in the body of evidence for each outcome assessed. si, Risk of Bias and Certainty of the
evidence Evidence Assessments
DISCUSSION
Discussion 23a Provide a general interpretation of the results in the context of other evidence. si, Discussion
23b Discuss any limitations of the evidence included in the review. si, Discussion
23c Discuss any limitations of the review processes used. si, Discussion
23d Discuss implications of the results for practice, policy, and future research. si, Discussion
OTHER INFORMATION
Registration and 24a Provide registration information for the review, including register name and registration number, or state that the review was not registered. no
protocol
24b Indicate where the review protocol can be accessed, or state that a protocol was not prepared. no
24c Describe and explain any amendments to information provided at registration or in the protocol. no
Support 25 Describe sources of financial or non-financial support for the review, and the role of the funders or sponsors in the review. no
Competing 26 Declare any competing interests of review authors. si, conclusions
interests
Availability of 27 Report which of the following are publicly available and where they can be found: template data collection forms; data extracted from included
data, code and studies; data used for all analyses; analytic code; any other materials used in the review. si,references
other materials

From: Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ 2021;372:n71. doi: 10.1136/bmj.n71