The article introduces the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) statement, an updated version of the QUOROM guidelines for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses. The PRISMA statement aims to improve the clarity and quality of reporting in these reviews, which are crucial for clinicians, researchers, and policy-makers. The PRISMA checklist consists of 27 items and a four-phase flow diagram, designed to guide authors in reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses comprehensively. The development of PRISMA involved a three-day meeting in Ottawa, Canada, in 2005, with participants from various fields. The checklist and flow diagram were revised based on extensive literature reviews and feedback from experts. Key features of PRISMA include addressing the iterative nature of systematic reviews, distinguishing between study-level and outcome-level assessments of bias, and emphasizing the importance of reporting biases. The PRISMA statement is intended to replace the QUOROM statement in journals that have endorsed it, and it is supported by an explanatory document that provides examples and evidence for each checklist item. The article also discusses the broader relevance of PRISMA to different types of systematic reviews and the need for ongoing development and refinement of the guidelines.The article introduces the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) statement, an updated version of the QUOROM guidelines for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses. The PRISMA statement aims to improve the clarity and quality of reporting in these reviews, which are crucial for clinicians, researchers, and policy-makers. The PRISMA checklist consists of 27 items and a four-phase flow diagram, designed to guide authors in reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses comprehensively. The development of PRISMA involved a three-day meeting in Ottawa, Canada, in 2005, with participants from various fields. The checklist and flow diagram were revised based on extensive literature reviews and feedback from experts. Key features of PRISMA include addressing the iterative nature of systematic reviews, distinguishing between study-level and outcome-level assessments of bias, and emphasizing the importance of reporting biases. The PRISMA statement is intended to replace the QUOROM statement in journals that have endorsed it, and it is supported by an explanatory document that provides examples and evidence for each checklist item. The article also discusses the broader relevance of PRISMA to different types of systematic reviews and the need for ongoing development and refinement of the guidelines.