Systematic review protocol and PROSPERO preparation

Reviewers and editors read a systematic review backwards from one question: were the methods decided before the results were known? A registered protocol is how you answer yes. It is the difference between an analysis a journal trusts and one it suspects was shaped to fit the findings. We build that defence into the structure of your review from day one, framing the question with the PICO framework so that every downstream decision, from the databases you search to the outcomes you pool, follows from a question you committed to in advance.

The protocol is also the master plan the rest of the project runs on. Once the eligibility criteria and the planned analysis are locked, your literature search and search strategy and your data extraction and coding have a fixed reference point, and disagreements between reviewers are settled against a written rule rather than an opinion formed mid-stream.

1. 1

   Structured review question

   We frame your question with PICO or an equivalent structure, naming the population, intervention or exposure, comparator, and outcomes so the scope is unambiguous.

2. 2

   Eligibility criteria and search plan

   We write inclusion and exclusion criteria that map to the question, list the databases, and draft the planned search so the strategy is reproducible.

3. 3

   Extraction, bias, and analysis plan

   We pre-specify the data items, the risk of bias tool, and the planned synthesis, including any subgroup or sensitivity analyses, before any study is read.

4. 4

   PROSPERO-ready record

   We complete the PROSPERO minimum dataset and hand you the finished record, ready to submit under your own account, with guidance for any queries the registry raises.

A protocol is not a free-form plan; it is expected to follow recognised guidance so editors and registries accept it without revision. We write to those standards from the outset.

You receive a finished protocol document written to the PRISMA 2020 expectations, a registration-ready PROSPERO record you submit under your own account, and a clean set of inclusion and exclusion criteria your screeners can apply consistently. If you want to understand the shape of the document before we start, our guide on how to write a systematic review protocol walks through each section, and the wider systematic review writing service can carry the project on from the registered protocol through to a submission-ready manuscript.

• A complete protocol document with a structured question and rationale
• Inclusion and exclusion criteria mapped to each element of the question
• A drafted search strategy ready to hand to the search stage
• A pre-specified data-extraction, risk-of-bias, and synthesis plan
• The completed PROSPERO record, ready to submit under your own account
• An amendment log set up so any later change is dated and documented

We quote a single fixed fee that covers writing the protocol and preparing the PROSPERO record to the registry's minimum dataset, with guidance on any queries the registry raises after you submit. What shapes the quote is how developed your question already is, whether the eligibility criteria and search concepts still need defining, and whether you want the protocol written from a topic alone or built out from notes you already have. Share where you are and we will return a fixed quote for the registration-ready protocol.