Chaimani, AnnaAnnaChaimaniCaldwell, Deborah MDeborah MCaldwellLi, TianjingTianjingLiHiggins, Julian PtJulian PtHigginsSalanti, GeorgiaGeorgiaSalanti0000-0002-3830-85082024-10-242024-10-242017-03https://boris-portal.unibe.ch/handle/20.500.12422/149034OBJECTIVES The number of systematic reviews that aim to compare multiple interventions using network meta-analysis is increasing. In this paper, we highlight aspects of a standard systematic review protocol that may need modification when multiple interventions are to be compared. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING We take the protocol format suggested by Cochrane for a standard systematic review as our reference, and compare the considerations for a pairwise review with those required for a valid comparison of multiple interventions. We suggest new sections for protocols of systematic reviews including network meta-analyses with a focus on how to evaluate their assumptions. We provide example text from published protocols to exemplify the considerations. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION Standard systematic review protocols for pairwise meta-analyses need extensions to accommodate the increased complexity of network meta-analysis. Our suggested modifications are widely applicable to both Cochrane and non-Cochrane systematic reviews involving network meta-analyses.encomparative effectiveness revieweligibility criteriatransitivitynetwork meta-analysisindirect comparisonmixed treatment comparison600 - Technology::610 - Medicine & health300 - Social sciences, sociology & anthropology::360 - Social problems & social servicesarticle10.7892/boris.943172808859310.1016/j.jclinepi.2016.11.015