FREE TEMPLATE
Free Systematic Review Protocol Template
Download a structured systematic-review protocol template to define your PICO question, eligibility criteria, information sources, screening process, extraction fields, risk-of-bias approach, and planned synthesis before beginning the review.
The Word download is a blank protocol template with the same fields and a protocol checklist.
Name the population, intervention, comparator, and primary outcome.
PROSPERO or OSF URL. Register before screening if you will claim prospective registration.
Who screens, who extracts, who is the arbiter, who runs statistics.
Why this review now, and what previous reviews left unanswered.
List primary vs secondary, timing, and measurement.
Study designs, settings, language, date limits, and hard excludes.
Databases, trial registers, grey literature, citation chasing.
Who writes it, whether it is peer-reviewed, how updates are handled.
Dual review, software, and conflict process.
Form, piloting, and how discrepancies are recorded.
Tool (RoB 2, ROBINS-I, QUADAS-2) and how judgements feed synthesis.
Meta-analysis vs narrative, effect measure, heterogeneity, subgroups.
Protocol checklist
- Review question / PICO defined
- Eligibility criteria (design, population, dates, language) specified
- Information sources and search strategy documented
- Screening and selection process (dual review, conflict resolution) defined
- Data extraction plan agreed
- Risk-of-bias plan (tool and process) selected
- Synthesis and analysis plan specified
- Reporting and registration considerations addressed (PRISMA 2020, PROSPERO/OSF)
Example eligibility criteria
Write eligibility criteria as yes/no tests a second reviewer could apply to the same abstract. For example:
- Include: randomized controlled trials only; exclude: quasi-experimental or observational designs
- Include: adults aged 18 and over; exclude: paediatric-only populations
- Include: minimum 12 weeks of follow-up; exclude: shorter follow-up unless it is the only reported timepoint
- Include: full-text peer-reviewed articles; exclude: conference abstracts without a linked full report
Registering your protocol on PROSPERO
PROSPERO is the international prospective register of systematic reviews, maintained by the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination at the University of York. Registration is free. It gives your review a CRD number you can cite, and it publicly timestamps your methods before you've seen the results — the whole point of a prospective registration.
Timing matters more than any other part of this. PROSPERO is for registering a review before it has progressed — in practice, before screening starts, and certainly before data extraction does. A registration submitted after you've already seen which studies are included stops being prospective in any meaningful sense, which is exactly what this checklist's "register before screening" item is protecting against.
Most of what PROSPERO's form asks for is already in the template above, under different labels. Roughly:
- Review title, named contact, and team → Title and Team fields above
- Anticipated start and completion dates, funding source
- Review question and PICO → Objectives (PICO) above
- Searches and information sources → Information sources and Search strategy above
- Condition or domain being studied, and the health area it falls under
- Data extraction and risk-of-bias plans → Data extraction and Risk of bias above
- Strategy for data synthesis → Synthesis plan above
Fill in the template above first; transferring it into PROSPERO's form then becomes mostly copy-and-adapt rather than starting from a blank page. PROSPERO runs a basic administrative check before a registration goes live (confirming it's an eligible, genuine systematic review — not a peer review of your methods), so submit with enough lead time before you intend to start screening. Eligibility rules, the current field set, and exact turnaround can change, so check PROSPERO's own guidance before you submit rather than relying on this page for the current specifics.
References
Moher D, Shamseer L, Clarke M, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Systematic Reviews. 2015;4:1. doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-4-1. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions (current version). training.cochrane.org/handbook.
Continue your review workflow
- Once the protocol is set, run title and abstract screening against these criteria.
- Track counts with a PRISMA 2020 flow diagram, or read the step-by-step PRISMA 2020 flow-diagram guide.
- Extract included studies with the data extraction template.
- Start a free EvidenceFlow review to keep the protocol, screening, and extraction on the same project.
Methods write-up: Protocol and PICO methods guide
What this template is for
It follows the topics in PRISMA-P: title, registration, team, rationale, eligibility, information sources, search, selection, extraction, risk of bias, and synthesis. It is a working draft, not a substitute for PROSPERO fields or a journal-specific protocol.
Register before screening if you will describe the review as prospectively registered. EvidenceFlow can store the research question and PICO on the project so screening uses the same criteria you wrote here.
FAQ
Frequently asked questions
Is this the official PRISMA-P checklist?+
It covers the same planning topics. For submission, complete the current PRISMA-P checklist and your registry's form (PROSPERO, OSF, or similar).
Do I need to pay to use this?+
No. The template and Markdown download run locally. Creating an EvidenceFlow project for screening and extraction is also free on the core workflow.
Should students register on PROSPERO?+
If the review is intended for publication and meets PROSPERO's eligibility, register before screening. Course-only exercises often stay as a local protocol.
Is there a PROSPERO protocol template I can use?+
This page's template maps closely to PROSPERO's own fields (PICO, information sources, extraction, risk of bias, synthesis plan) - fill it in here first, then transfer it into PROSPERO's form. PROSPERO's own site has the current, authoritative field list and eligibility rules; this template gets you most of the way there before you start.
Can I change the protocol later?+
Yes, but log amendments with a date and reason. Unlogged changes after seeing the results undermine the review.
Paste this PICO into a free EvidenceFlow project and keep screening decisions on the same criteria — no payment for import, manual screening, extraction, or PRISMA reporting.
Start free project