Systematic and Scoping Review Protocols: PROSPERO, OSF and Templates

What a review protocol is, and why it matters

A systematic or scoping review protocol is the plan written before the review starts: the question, eligibility criteria, search strategy, screening, data extraction and synthesis methods. Publishing or registering it in advance makes the review transparent, reduces duplicated effort, and lets readers check whether the final review changed course after seeing the evidence.

The same discipline is now expected in regulated evidence work, from clinical evaluation reports to health technology assessment dossiers, which is why protocol quality matters well beyond academia.

Systematic review vs scoping review protocols

	Systematic review	Scoping review
Purpose	Answer a focused question, often about effectiveness or accuracy	Map the extent and nature of evidence on a broader topic
Question framework	Commonly PICO (population, intervention, comparator, outcome)	Commonly PCC (population, concept, context)
Critical appraisal	Expected	Optional
Reporting guideline for the protocol	PRISMA-P	Typically follows JBI guidance
PROSPERO registration	Eligible if there is a health-related outcome	Not accepted

What to include: PRISMA-P

The reference standard for systematic review protocols is PRISMA-P 2015, whose checklist contains “17 items considered to be essential and minimum components” of a protocol (Shamseer et al., BMJ 2015). In practice, a protocol covers:

1. Administrative information: title, registration, authors, amendments plan, support.
2. Introduction: rationale and explicit objectives (for example, PICO).
3. Eligibility criteria: study and report characteristics.
4. Information sources and search strategy: databases, dates, and a full draft search for at least one database.
5. Study records: data management, selection process and data collection process.
6. Data items and outcomes: what will be extracted and how outcomes are prioritized.
7. Risk of bias: methods for individual studies.
8. Data synthesis: criteria for quantitative synthesis, heterogeneity, additional analyses.
9. Meta-bias and confidence in cumulative evidence: for example, publication bias and certainty of evidence.

PRISMA 2020 is the reporting guideline for the completed review; PRISMA-P is the one for the protocol.

Scoping review protocols: the JBI approach

JBI’s manual describes a nine-step scoping review process, with the first three steps dedicated to developing the protocol: defining objectives and questions, developing eligibility criteria aligned with them, and describing the planned approach to searching, selecting, extracting, analyzing and presenting evidence. If equity issues will be examined, JBI asks authors to say so in the protocol.

Where to register a protocol

PROSPERO

PROSPERO’s registration guidance accepts protocols for interventions, diagnostic accuracy, prognostic factors, prevention, epidemiology, public health, health and social care delivery and methodological reviews. Key rules:

• Registration must happen before data extraction starts (in force since October 2019).
• The protocol should be complete and resources confirmed.
• The review must have an outcome of direct relevance to human health.
• Scoping reviews are not accepted, nor literature reviews that only use a systematic search.
• Cochrane protocols are uploaded automatically.

OSF and other options

University library guidance such as Binghamton’s scoping review guide points to the Open Science Framework (OSF) as a common place to deposit protocols and describes osf.io as “the preferred repository for non-clinical systematic reviews.” The JBI Systematic Review Register is limited to JBI-affiliated entities. Many authors also publish protocols in journals that accept them.

Systematic review protocol steps

1. Check for existing reviews and registered protocols on the same question.
2. Frame the question (PICO or PCC) with stakeholders.
3. Draft eligibility criteria and a full search for at least one database, ideally with an information specialist.
4. Define screening, extraction and risk-of-bias methods, including how disagreements are resolved.
5. Plan synthesis and certainty-of-evidence assessment.
6. Check the draft against PRISMA-P (or JBI guidance for scoping reviews).
7. Register (PROSPERO or OSF) before data extraction begins.
8. Record and date every later amendment.

Common weaknesses

• Registering after screening or extraction has started.
• Search strategy described only in general terms, with no full draft search.
• Outcomes not prioritized, leaving room for selective reporting.
• No plan for handling disagreements between reviewers.
• Scoping reviews submitted to PROSPERO and rejected late.
• Amendments made without dated records, so readers cannot tell what changed and when.

Checklist: review protocol readiness

• Question framed with PICO or PCC and aligned objectives
• Eligibility criteria explicit and testable
• Full search strategy for at least one database included
• Screening, extraction and risk-of-bias methods defined
• Synthesis and certainty-of-evidence approach stated
• All 17 PRISMA-P items addressed (or JBI elements for scoping reviews)
• Correct registry chosen (PROSPERO for eligible systematic reviews; OSF or journal for scoping reviews)
• Registration completed before data extraction
• Amendment log in place

How AskDona helps

Protocols are long and checklist-driven, and the gap between protocol and final review is where reviewers find problems. AskDona reads a draft protocol against PRISMA-P or your institution’s template, flags missing or vague items, and later compares the protocol with the finished review to show where methods changed, citing the exact section each time. Run a sample protocol completeness check against PRISMA-P before you register. AskDona shows the evidence; your review team decides.

Editor’s note: PROSPERO’s main web pages require JavaScript and could not be read directly; its registration rules come from the PROSPERO guidance PDF, which shows no revision date. The PRISMA-P item list above is a grouped summary; consult the official checklist for the exact 17 items. OSF guidance comes from a university library page, not from OSF itself.

FAQ

What is a systematic review protocol? A plan written before a systematic review starts that sets out the question, eligibility criteria, search, screening, extraction and synthesis methods.

Can I register a scoping review protocol in PROSPERO? No. PROSPERO’s guidance lists scoping reviews among review types it does not accept. OSF is a common alternative.

When must a PROSPERO protocol be registered? Before data extraction starts.

What is PRISMA-P? The 2015 reporting guideline for systematic review protocols, with 17 minimum items.

Is there a scoping review protocol template? JBI guidance is the most widely used basis for scoping review protocols, and many university libraries publish templates built on it.

References

All pages opened and checked by October 19, 2026.

Source	Type	Used for
PRISMA-P 2015 E&E (White Rose repository)	Peer-reviewed guideline	17 protocol items
PROSPERO guidance for registering human studies	Registry guidance	Eligibility and timing
JBI Manual 10.2	Methodology manual	Scoping review protocol steps
Binghamton University Libraries guide	University library	Registration options, OSF