Registering a systematic review protocol involves making your research intentions publicly accessible through an online platform. This process enhances transparency, reduces duplication of efforts, and allows other researchers to be aware of ongoing systematic reviews. For instance, if someone is planning to conduct a review on the same topic, they can redirect their focus if they discover that work is already underway.
Therefore, before developing your own protocol, it is essential to search existing protocol registries to confirm whether someone else is already working on a similar or identical topic. This simple step can save time and ensure efficient use of research resources.
Below is an overview of key platforms where you can register or publish a systematic review protocol, including details on their ownership, scope, discipline focus, and costs involved.
1. PROSPERO
Owner: University of York, Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (UK)
Discipline Focus: Health and social care
Scope: Systematic reviews of interventions, diagnosis, prognosis, etc., involving human health
Cost: Free
Recommendation: Highly recommended for systematic reviews in health and clinical fields. PROSPERO is the most recognized registry for health-related reviews and is widely accepted in academia and journals.
2. Open Science Framework (OSF)
Owner: Center for Open Science (USA)
Discipline Focus: Multidisciplinary (including health, education, psychology, and social sciences)
Scope: Open platform for pre-registration of any kind of research, including systematic reviews and meta-analyses
Cost: Free
Recommendation: Ideal for interdisciplinary work. OSF is user-friendly, supports document uploads, and allows updating and version control of protocols.
3. Cochrane Library – Cochrane Protocols
Owner: Cochrane Collaboration (International)
Discipline Focus: Healthcare and clinical interventions
Scope: Protocols developed for Cochrane Reviews following strict methodological standards
Cost: Typically, free for authors working within Cochrane Review Groups; otherwise, involvement requires collaboration with a Cochrane Group
Recommendation: Best for highly rigorous reviews and those working within Cochrane’s collaborative network. Note that not all researchers may qualify or have access.
4. INPLASY (International Platform of Registered Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Protocols)
Owner: INPLASY (Portugal-based)
Discipline Focus: Health sciences, including medicine, nursing, and public health
Scope: Rapid registration of systematic review protocols; broad acceptance
Cost: Processing fee applies (varies; typically, around $20–50)
Recommendation: Good alternative to PROSPERO for quicker registration, especially when dealing with tight timelines. Offers DOI and indexing.
5. Research Registry
Owner: Research Registry Ltd (UK)
Discipline Focus: Health and medical research
Scope: Includes systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and other types of research studies
Cost: Processing fees apply (usually higher than INPLASY)
Recommendation: Useful for reviews and case reports. May be suitable for researchers seeking open access exposure with indexing.
6. Protocols.io
Owner: Protocols.io, Inc. (USA)
Discipline Focus: Broad; includes biological sciences, chemistry, and medicine
Scope: Platform for sharing research protocols and methods, including those for systematic reviews
Cost: Free basic access; premium features may require payment
Recommendation: Useful for sharing detailed methodologies and collaborating with teams. Less commonly used for formal systematic review registration compared to PROSPERO or OSF.
7. Campbell Collaboration
Owner: Campbell Collaboration (International)
Discipline Focus: Social sciences – including education, crime and justice, social welfare, and international development
Scope: Systematic reviews related to policy and practice in social domains
Cost: Free
Recommendation: Ideal for researchers in the social sciences or applied policy fields. Follows rigorous methods and peer-review of protocols.
Summary of Platform Recommendations
| Platform | Best For | Cost | Discipline Focus |
|---|---|---|---|
| PROSPERO | Health/clinical reviews | Free | Health, social care |
| OSF | Interdisciplinary and flexible registration | Free | All disciplines |
| Cochrane Library | Rigorous, Cochrane-affiliated protocols | Free* | Healthcare |
| INPLASY | Fast registration with DOI | Fee | Health sciences |
| Research Registry | Broad exposure with indexing | Fee | Health, clinical |
| Protocols.io | Method sharing and collaboration | Free/Paid | Science and research |
| Campbell Collab. | Social science-focused reviews | Free | Education, justice, welfare |
* Free if affiliated with a Cochrane Review Group
Final Thoughts
When selecting a registry for your systematic review protocol, consider:
Scope of your topic (health, education, interdisciplinary, etc.)
Visibility and indexing (important for academic publishing)
Registration speed (e.g., PROSPERO can take weeks, INPLASY is faster)
Costs involved (free vs. paid services)
In most cases, PROSPERO or OSF will be sufficient and widely accepted. If you’re in a rush or outside traditional academic systems, INPLASY offers a quick and practical alternative.
You may also like: