The search strategy and flow diagram of systematic reviews and meta-analyses included in Group C, published in 9 GH journal endorsing PRISMA in the year preceding PRISMA endorsement.

<p>The search strategy and flow diagram of systematic reviews and meta-analyses included in Group C, published in 9 GH journal endorsing PRISMA in the year preceding PRISMA endorsement.</p

The search strategy and flow diagram for database search of systematic reviews and meta-analyses included in groups A and B, published in 9 GH journals endorsing PRISMA in the Instructions to Authors.

<p>The search strategy and flow diagram for database search of systematic reviews and meta-analyses included in groups A and B, published in 9 GH journals endorsing PRISMA in the Instructions to Authors.</p

Evaluation of the adherence to PRISMA checklist of 90 systematic reviews and meta-analyses.

<p>CI: confidence interval na: non-applicable.</p>†<p> = papers explicitly endorsing PRISMA in journals endorsing (or mandating) PRISMA.</p>‡<p> = papers not-explicitly endorsing PRISMA in journals endorsing (or mandating) PRISMA.</p>○<p> = papers published in journals endorsing PRISMA (the year preceding its endorsement).</p>i<p> = papers from top 10 highest GH journals which never adopted PRISMA.</p>**<p>p<0.01.</p><p>p-value calculated for each of these comparisons A vs B, A vs C, A+B vs D.</p

A quality assessment of the 90 systematic reviews and meta-analyses using the AMSTAR checklist.

<p>CI: confidence interval.</p>†<p> = papers explicitly endorsing PRISMA in journals endorsing (or mandating) PRISMA.</p>‡<p> = papers not-explicitly endorsing PRISMA in journals endorsing (or mandating) PRISMA.</p>○<p> = papers published in journals endorsing PRISMA (the year preceding its endorsement).</p>i<p> = papers from top 10 highest GH journals which never adopted PRISMA.</p>*<p>p-value<0.05.</p><p>** p<0.01.</p><p>*** p<0.001.</p><p>p-value calculated for each of these comparisons A vs B, A vs C, A+B vs D.</p

Characteristics of 90 systematic reviews and meta-analyses evaluated.

<p>CI: confidence interval.</p>†<p> = papers explicitly endorsing PRISMA in journals endorsing (or mandating) PRISMA.</p>‡<p> = papers not-explicitly endorsing PRISMA in journals endorsing (or mandating) PRISMA.</p>○<p> = papers published in journals endorsing PRISMA (the year preceding its endorsement).</p>i<p> = papers from top 10 highest GH journals which never adopted PRISMA.</p>*<p>p-value<0.05.</p><p>** p<0.01.</p>***<p>p<0.001.</p><p>p-value calculated for each of these comparisons A vs B, A vs C, A+B vs D.</p><p>Values are expressed as median and interquartile range.</p

The search strategy and flow diagram for database search of systematic reviews and meta-analyses included in Group D, published in top 10 GH journals that never endorsed PRISMA.

<p>The search strategy and flow diagram for database search of systematic reviews and meta-analyses included in Group D, published in top 10 GH journals that never endorsed PRISMA.</p

Assessment of the methodological quality of case-control and cohort studies published in OA and non-OA journals using the Newcastle and Ottawa Scale (NOS).

<p>Assessment of the methodological quality of case-control and cohort studies published in OA and non-OA journals using the Newcastle and Ottawa Scale (NOS).</p

Flow-chart of literature searching.

<p>Flow-chart of literature searching.</p

The search strategy and identification process of oncology journals and appraised studies.

<p>The search strategy and identification process of oncology journals and appraised studies.</p

Proportion of adequate reporting according to the STROBE checklist of the case-control and cohort studies published in OA and non-OA journals using the STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology (STROBE).

<p>Proportion of adequate reporting according to the STROBE checklist of the case-control and cohort studies published in OA and non-OA journals using the STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology (STROBE).</p