Introduction to Meta Analysis Protocol

Methods and analysis This review protocol follows the recommendations of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols reporting guidelines.

Methods: The protocol was prepared using the 2015 statement of Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols.

Therefore, this systematic review and meta-analysis protocol is planned to explore the effect of Baduanjin exercise in patients with CHD who have undergone PCI.

This protocol will be reported per the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols guidelines.

The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols guideline and Patient, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes, Study design model were used in analysing the studies.

This protocol will follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis Protocols Extension for Scoping Reviews.

Methods and analysis The scoping review process will be guided by the methodology framework of Arksey and O’Malley and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis Protocols Extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines.

This systematic review and meta-analysis protocol will be reported based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analysis protocol guidelines.

Methods will follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) guidelines and the protocol has been registered in PROSPERO database (registration number: CRD42021247888).

The Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Diagnostic Test Accuracy was used to structure our methodological approach and the Preferred Reporting Items for a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols guidelines in reporting the findings of this review.

The protocol will be reported according to the approach and preferred report items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA - P).

METHOD: Systematic review based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis protocol.

Methods This protocol is reported according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) and the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) guidelines.

Methods: This protocol was prepared in accordance with the preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) statement.

Method: The framework for this review will be adapted from the guidelines laid out in the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement.

Methods and analysis A systematic review has been designed and reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols.

Methods This protocol has been developed following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P).

Data sources: We followed the guidelines of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P), and searched the PubMed and Embase platforms for the keywords [brain damage OR pregnancy OR developmental outcomes] and [coronavirus OR SARS-CoV-2 OR SARS-CoV OR MERS-CoV] between January 1, 2000 and June 1, 2020.

Methods: This study follows the criteria proposed by Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Protocols.

We have developed a protocol according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Protocol using the population, intervention, comparison, outcome, and study design (PICOS) framework for post-menopausal women who have received no treatment, laser therapy, placebo, or vaginal estrogen for GSM.

Ethics and dissemination This systematic review and meta-analysis protocol is designed to provide updated evidence on the PF of Latin American children and adolescents.

This review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA) guidelines.

Methods: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) was used to prepare our protocol and the results will be reported according to the PRISMA.

METHOD This was a mixed-methods systematic review that followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Protocols checklist.

Methods The study was designed based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-2015 Guidelines).

</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:p>The search was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic review and Meta-analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 (3).

A systematic review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) and The Cochrane Handbook of Systematic Reviews of Interventions.

This meta-analysis protocol had been registered online (available at: https://inplasy.

A standard meta-analysis protocol was developed and after performing a comprehensive literature search on MEDLINE/PubMed, Cochrane databases, and International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, reviewers extracted data from 97 randomized controlled trials.

Methodology: Using integrative review methods proposed by Whittemore and Knafl (2005), we searched through EBSCO Host, ArticleFirst, Cochrane Central Registry of Controlled Trials, Emerald Insight, JSTOR, PubMed, Springer Link, Electronic collections online, and Google Scholar databases guided by the preferred reporting item for systematic review and meta-analysis protocol (PRISMA) guideline.

DESIGN A systematic review of literature was performed on electronic databases using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Protocols.

Three authors were involved in removing duplicates, screening, and selection of relevant articles according to the PRISMA-P (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Protocols) guidelines.

METHODS The study adopted a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol.

Data Extraction and Synthesis: This study was conducted in accordance with the preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement.

This integrative review was guided by the Preferred Reporting Items of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Protocols.

Methods: This study will be conducted in strict accordance with the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis protocols.

Methods and analysis This protocol was prepared according to the preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) statement.

Systematic review was performed using electronic databases according to the PRISMA-P (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols) guidelines.

Methods and analysis This overview was designed in accordance with the PRIO-harms and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols guidelines and its protocol was registered at PROSPERO.

Methods and analysis This protocol for a systematic review is informed by Cochrane guidelines and reported in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Protocols.

We will follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) involving Network Meta-analysis guidelines for the design and reporting of the results.

This protocol is written according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-analysis Protocols 2015 statement (see Additional file 1).

The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) have also been adopted when preparing this protocol and will be followed in the study proper.

This protocol follows the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) guidelines.

Methods: This protocol adheres to the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis protocol statement.

Methods and analysis Aligning with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols guidelines, a search will be conducted in PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Web of Science.

The protocol for this systematic review was developed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic review and Meta-Analysis Protocols, and followed methods outlined in The Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions.

The protocol will be conducted according to approach and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols 2015.

OBJECTIVES This review considered the following question: What is the influence of nursing and personal care staffing levels (registered nurse, licensed practical nurse, and nursing assistant) and / or skill mix on long-term care residents, measured by quality of care indicators? DESIGN Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Protocols guided the report of this systematic review.

Methods: Databases (PubMed, African Journal Online, and Google scholar) were searched following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statements for articles reporting VRE prevalence, and were published before August 5, 2020.

STUDY DESIGN The protocol of this systematic reviews was established according to the guidelines of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P); the following databases were searched: PubMed/Medline, Scopus, Google Scholar and Web of Science.

The systematic review and meta-analysis protocol was recorded in the prospective record of systematic reviews by PROSPERO International: CRD42019120391.

Systematic Review Registration International Platform of Registered Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (INPLASY), identifier INPLASY202050057.

Methods and analysis A systematic review will be conducted using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P).

Methods This systematic review protocol was prepared according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 Statement.

This protocol was developed following the 2015 guidelines of Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols.

This protocol is reported in keeping with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols guidelines.

The review protocol was developed using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols recommendations.

Methods: We used the Cochrane Collaboration and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) guidelines to articulate this protocol.

Methods and analysis The reporting of this protocol adheres to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) checklist.

Methods and analysis The protocol for conducting the review was prepared using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols guidelines.

This systematic review was planned by following the recommendations of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement.

The protocol will be conducted according to the approach and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P).

Method: This study use a systematic review method using PRISMA-P (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocole) 2009.

Systematic Review Registration: International Platform of Registered Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis Protocols (INPLASY), number INPLASY202150039.

The study performed a systematic review guided by the Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) and the scoping studies methodological framework to compile an evidence-based literature review on Moistube irrigation.

We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 guidelines for the design and reporting of the results.

International Platform of Registered Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols registration number: INPLASY202140044.

Therefore, we developed this systematic review and meta-analysis protocol to assess the effectiveness and safety of CHFs in the therapy of SP, so as to provide reliable evidence-based evidence for clinical decision-making.

Methods: A protocol was created using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis Protocols extension for Scoping Reviews.

The systematic review follows the recommendations of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) on reporting systematic reviews.

A systematic review of literature identified 10 research articles that study the impact of lactation telehealth using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis Protocols (PRISMA).

Literature selection was performed according to the guidelines of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA) 2015.

MethodsThis protocol is reported according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) and the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) guidelines.

A systematic review of English, Spanish, Chinese, French and Turkish languages from 2000 to December 23rd, 2019, using the preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) guidelines, was conducted.

Design We used an abbreviated Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols to identify studies that investigated the effectiveness of travel-related measures preprinted or published by 1 June 2020.

We followed PICOS description model for defining eligibility and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 guidelines for reporting results.

Trial Registration International Platform of Registered Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Protocols INPLASY202130081; https://inplasy.

Methods The review was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P).

METHODS In the literature review, the flow chart of PRISMA-P (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols) was used.

This review was conducted according to the 2015 PRISMA-P checklist (Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols).

INPLASY registration number: We registered this protocol in International Plateform of Registered Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (INPLASY) platform and obtained an identifier of INPLASY2020110043 (https://inplasy.

Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) guidelines, searches were performed among published and unpublished articles.

The past 10 years of the search were performed to report the data following systematic review and meta-analysis protocol (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement.

Methods The protocol was developed and reported following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P).

The protocol was registered in the International Platform of Registered Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Protocols (registration number: INPLASY2020120090).

This protocol reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) statement, and we will report the systematic review by following the PRISMA statement.

Methods This is a protocol for a systematic review with meta-analysis that will be reported as recommended by Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Protocols, bias will be assessed with the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool—version 2, our eight-step procedure will be used to assess if the thresholds for clinical significance are crossed, Trial Sequential Analysis will be conducted to control random errors and the certainty of the evidence will be assessed with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach.

Registration: The systematic review and meta-analysis protocol is registered in the International Prospective Register of Ongoing Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) with number CRD42021272226.

Methods and analysis This protocol is guided by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols and the Cochrane Collaboration Handbook.

This protocol has been arranged according to the PRISMA-P (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols) 2015 checklist.

Registration: This protocol has been registered on the International Platform of Registered Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Protocols (INPLASY registration number: INPLASY2020110093; INPLASY DOI number: 10.

Researchers used Emerald as the primary reference source and developed a meta-analysis protocol by structuring the literature as follows Global Halal Industry Halal Certification, Centralization halal hub, Halal certification, Halal Harmonization, Level of knowledge, Halal Tourism, Halal Food, Halal Cargo, Halal during Pandemic Covid -19.

Methods and analysis This review will be conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols.

A systematic review and meta-analysis will be applied by following the preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P).

The systematic review protocol was registered on the PROSPERO platform (CRD42018089556), developed in accordance with the "Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015" and within the "SWiM guideline 2019".

This protocol is guided by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic review and Meta-Analysis Protocol (PRISMA-P).

Methods and analysis This systematic review and meta-analysis protocol follows the recommendation of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols.