Home > FAQ > CONSORT, STROBE, or PRISMA: which checklist fits my manuscript?

CONSORT, STROBE, or PRISMA: which checklist fits my manuscript?

November 2, 2026
reporting guidelinesrandomized trialsobservational studiessystematic reviewsmanuscript checklist

Match the checklist to your study design: use CONSORT for a randomized trial, STROBE for a cohort, case-control, or cross-sectional study, and PRISMA for a systematic review. Each checklist covers reporting completeness for its own design, so the design decides the choice.

Match the design to the checklist

  • CONSORT is the reporting guideline and checklist for randomized trials. It supports complete reporting of a trial.
  • STROBE provides reporting checklists for cohort, case-control, and cross-sectional observational studies.
  • PRISMA 2020 provides a checklist and flow diagrams for systematic reviews, covering why the review was done, what methods were used, and what studies were found and included.

Build a section-level item map

  1. Identify the design your manuscript reports, such as a randomized trial, an observational study, or a systematic review. The result is one checklist whose scope matches that design.
  2. Copy the checklist items into a table with columns for the item, the manuscript section that addresses it (for example Methods or Results), and the page or paragraph where it appears. The result is a map from each item to a location in your draft.
  3. Mark each item as addressed, partially addressed, or missing, then revise the sections with gaps. The result is a draft that reports each item in the section the checklist assigns it to.

Treat all three as reporting-completeness tools. CONSORT supports complete reporting of a trial, and STROBE assesses reporting completeness, not study quality. Use the checklist to confirm that your manuscript reports what the design requires; judge study quality through separate appraisal.

←
PreviousWhich publication year should I use when online-first and issue dates differ?
NextFor conflicting trial results, should I compare ClinicalTrials.gov results with the published paper?
→