PRISMA 2009 Checklist

Reported
Section/topic # Checklist item
on page #
TITLE
Title 1 Identify the report as a systematic review, meta-analysis, or both. Tidak
FINANCIAL Tidak memaparkan sistemtika review, penelitian menggunakan metode kualitatif ataupun metode kuantitatif ditemukan
PERFORMANCES
MEASUREMENT TOOLS
ABSTRACT
Structured summary 2 Provide a structured summary including, as applicable: background; objectives; data sources; study eligibility criteria, Halaman
participants, and interventions; study appraisal and synthesis methods; results; limitations; conclusions and 169
implications of key findings; systematic review registration number.
Di bagian abstrak tidak terdapat keterbatasan; kesimpulan dan implikasi dari setiap kata kunci yang
diberikan
INTRODUCTION
Rationale 3 Describe the rationale for the review in the context of what is already known. Halaman
A large part of researchers Menjelaskan alasan untuk meninjau ulang dalam konteks apa yang sudah diketahui 169
regard corporate
performances as elements
of management
performances with
reference to financial and
non-financial
performances. Strategic
performance is another
approach to corporate
performance, being
considered as a sequence
of steps with the role of
ensuring implementation
of strategic, tactical and
operational plans in line
with the objectives to
achieve.
Objectives 4 Provide an explicit statement of questions being addressed with reference to participants, interventions, Tidak
comparisons, outcomes, and study design (PICOS).
 PRISMA 2009 Checklist
Tidak adanya perbandingan dari beberapa penelitian terdahulu ditemukan

METHODS
Protocol and registration
Eligibility criteria
5 Indicate if a review protocol exists, if and where it can be accessed (e.g., Web address), and, if available, provide Tidak
registration information including registration number. ditemukan
Tidak adanya protokol peninjauan yang dapat diakses (mis., Alamat Web)
6 Specify study characteristics (e.g., PICOS, length of follow-up) and report characteristics (e.g., years considered, Tidak
language, publication status) used as criteria for eligibility, giving rationale. ditemukan
Tidak adanya karakteristik penelitian (mis., PICOS, lama tindak lanjut) dan karakteristik laporan (mis.,
Tahun yang dipertimbangkan, bahasa, status publikasi) yang digunakan sebagai kriteria untuk kelayakan,
memberikan alasan.

Information sources 7 Describe all information sources (e.g., databases with dates of coverage, contact with study authors to identify Halaman
additional studies) in the search and date last searched. 170
Search 8 Present full electronic search strategy for at least one database, including any limits used, such that it could be Halaman
repeated. 170-171
Study selection 9 State the process for selecting studies (i.e., screening, eligibility, included in systematic review, and, if applicable, Halaman
included in the meta-analysis). 171-172
Data collection process 10 Describe method of data extraction from reports (e.g., piloted forms, independently, in duplicate) and any processes Halaman
for obtaining and confirming data from investigators. 171-172
Data items 11 List and define all variables for which data were sought (e.g., PICOS, funding sources) and any assumptions and Halaman
simplifications made. 172
Risk of bias in individual 12 Describe methods used for assessing risk of bias of individual studies (including specification of whether this was Halaman
studies done at the study or outcome level), and how this information is to be used in any data synthesis. 170
Summary measures 13 State the principal summary measures (e.g., risk ratio, difference in means). Halaman
170
Synthesis of results 14 Describe the methods of handling data and combining results of studies, if done, including measures of consistency Halaman
(e.g., I2) for each meta-analysis. 171
Page 1 of 2
Reported
Section/topic # Checklist item
on page #
Risk of bias across studies 15 Specify any assessment of risk of bias that may affect the cumulative evidence (e.g., publication bias, selective Tidak
reporting within studies). ditemukan
 PRISMA 2009 Checklist
Additional analyses 16 Describe methods of additional analyses (e.g., sensitivity or subgroup analyses, meta-regression), if done, indicating Tidak
which were pre-specified. ditemukan
RESULTS
Study selection 17 Give numbers of studies screened, assessed for eligibility, and included in the review, with reasons for exclusions at Halaman
each stage, ideally with a flow diagram. 170
Study characteristics 18 For each study, present characteristics for which data were extracted (e.g., study size, PICOS, follow-up period) and Halaman
provide the citations. 171-172
Risk of bias within studies 19 Present data on risk of bias of each study and, if available, any outcome level assessment (see item 12). Tidak
ditemukan
Results of individual studies 20 For all outcomes considered (benefits or harms), present, for each study: (a) simple summary data for each Tidak
intervention group (b) effect estimates and confidence intervals, ideally with a forest plot. ditemukan
Synthesis of results 21 Present results of each meta-analysis done, including confidence intervals and measures of consistency. Tidak
ditemukan
Risk of bias across studies 22 Present results of any assessment of risk of bias across studies (see Item 15). Tidak
ditemukan
Additional analysis 23 Give results of additional analyses, if done (e.g., sensitivity or subgroup analyses, meta-regression [see Item 16]). Tidak
ditemukan
DISCUSSION
Summary of evidence 24 Summarize the main findings including the strength of evidence for each main outcome; consider their relevance to Halaman
key groups (e.g., healthcare providers, users, and policy makers). 172-173
Limitations 25 Discuss limitations at study and outcome level (e.g., risk of bias), and at review-level (e.g., incomplete retrieval of Tidak
identified research, reporting bias). ditemukan
Conclusions 26 Provide a general interpretation of the results in the context of other evidence, and implications for future research. Halaman
173
FUNDING
Funding 27 Describe sources of funding for the systematic review and other support (e.g., supply of data); role of funders for the Tidak
systematic review. ditemukan

From: Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, The PRISMA Group (2009). Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement. PLoS Med 6(7): e1000097.
doi:10.1371/journal.pmed1000097
For more information, visit: www.prisma-statement.org.
Page 2 of 2
 PRISMA 2009 Checklist

Reported
Section/topic # Checklist item
on page #
TITLE
Title 1 Identify the report as a systematic review, meta-analysis, or both. 1003
Quality improvement and Memaparkan sistemtika review, penelitian menggunakan metode kualitatif ataupun metode kuantitatif
hospital financial
performance
 PRISMA 2009 Checklist
ABSTRACT
Structured summary 2 Provide a structured summary including, as applicable: background; objectives; data sources; study eligibility criteria, 1003
participants, and interventions; study appraisal and synthesis methods; results; limitations; conclusions and
implications of key findings; systematic review registration number.
Di bagian abstrak tidak terdapat keterbatasan
INTRODUCTION
Rationale 3 Describe the rationale for the review in the context of what is already known. 1004
Menjelaskan alasan untuk meninjau ulang dalam konteks apa yang sudah diketahui
Objectives 4 Provide an explicit statement of questions being addressed with reference to participants, interventions, Tidak
comparisons, outcomes, and study design (PICOS). ditemukan
Tidak adanya perbandingan dari beberapa penelitian terdahulu
METHODS
Protocol and registration 5 Indicate if a review protocol exists, if and where it can be accessed (e.g., Web address), and, if available, provide Tidak
registration information including registration number. ditemukan
Tidak adanya protokol peninjauan yang dapat diakses (mis., Alamat Web)
Eligibility criteria 6 Specify study characteristics (e.g., PICOS, length of follow-up) and report characteristics (e.g., years considered, 1009
language, publication status) used as criteria for eligibility, giving rationale.
adanya karakteristik penelitian (mis., PICOS, lama tindak lanjut) dan karakteristik laporan (mis., Tahun
yang dipertimbangkan, bahasa, status publikasi) yang digunakan sebagai kriteria untuk kelayakan,
memberikan alasan.

Information sources 7 Describe all information sources (e.g., databases with dates of coverage, contact with study authors to identify 1009
additional studies) in the search and date last searched.
Search 8 Present full electronic search strategy for at least one database, including any limits used, such that it could be 1010-
repeated. 1011
Study selection 9 State the process for selecting studies (i.e., screening, eligibility, included in systematic review, and, if applicable, 1013
included in the meta-analysis).
Data collection process 10 Describe method of data extraction from reports (e.g., piloted forms, independently, in duplicate) and any processes 1012
for obtaining and confirming data from investigators.
Data items 11 List and define all variables for which data were sought (e.g., PICOS, funding sources) and any assumptions and 1009-
simplifications made. 1012
Risk of bias in individual 12 Describe methods used for assessing risk of bias of individual studies (including specification of whether this was 1013
studies done at the study or outcome level), and how this information is to be used in any data synthesis.
Summary measures 13 State the principal summary measures (e.g., risk ratio, difference in means). 1014-
 PRISMA 2009 Checklist
1015
Synthesis of results 14 Describe the methods of handling data and combining results of studies, if done, including measures of consistency 1015
(e.g., I2) for each meta-analysis.

Page 1 of 2
Reported
Section/topic # Checklist item
on page #
Risk of bias across studies 15 Specify any assessment of risk of bias that may affect the cumulative evidence (e.g., publication bias, selective Tidak
reporting within studies). ditemukan
Additional analyses 16 Describe methods of additional analyses (e.g., sensitivity or subgroup analyses, meta-regression), if done, indicating Tidak
which were pre-specified. ditemukan
RESULTS
Study selection 17 Give numbers of studies screened, assessed for eligibility, and included in the review, with reasons for exclusions at 1015-
each stage, ideally with a flow diagram. 1021
Study characteristics 18 For each study, present characteristics for which data were extracted (e.g., study size, PICOS, follow-up period) and 1015-
provide the citations. 1021
Risk of bias within studies 19 Present data on risk of bias of each study and, if available, any outcome level assessment (see item 12). 1015-
1021
Results of individual studies 20 For all outcomes considered (benefits or harms), present, for each study: (a) simple summary data for each Tidak
intervention group (b) effect estimates and confidence intervals, ideally with a forest plot. ditemukan
Synthesis of results 21 Present results of each meta-analysis done, including confidence intervals and measures of consistency. Tidak
ditemukan
Risk of bias across studies 22 Present results of any assessment of risk of bias across studies (see Item 15). Tidak
ditemukan
Additional analysis 23 Give results of additional analyses, if done (e.g., sensitivity or subgroup analyses, meta-regression [see Item 16]). Tidak
ditemukan
DISCUSSION
Summary of evidence 24 Summarize the main findings including the strength of evidence for each main outcome; consider their relevance to 1022-
key groups (e.g., healthcare providers, users, and policy makers). 1023
Limitations 25 Discuss limitations at study and outcome level (e.g., risk of bias), and at review-level (e.g., incomplete retrieval of 1023
identified research, reporting bias).
Conclusions 26 Provide a general interpretation of the results in the context of other evidence, and implications for future research. 1022-
1023
FUNDING
 PRISMA 2009 Checklist
Funding 27 Describe sources of funding for the systematic review and other support (e.g., supply of data); role of funders for the Tidak
systematic review. ditemukan

From: Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, The PRISMA Group (2009). Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement. PLoS Med 6(7): e1000097.
doi:10.1371/journal.pmed1000097
For more information, visit: www.prisma-statement.org.
Page 2 of 2

Reported
Section/topic # Checklist item
on page #
TITLE
Title 1 Identify the report as a systematic review, meta-analysis, or both. Tidak
Participation in Tidak memaparkan sistemtika review, penelitian menggunakan metode kualitatif ataupun metode kuantitatif ditemukan
Performance
Measurement Systems
and Level of Satisfaction
ABSTRACT
Structured summary 2 Provide a structured summary including, as applicable: background; objectives; data sources; study eligibility criteria, 159
participants, and interventions; study appraisal and synthesis methods; results; limitations; conclusions and
implications of key findings; systematic review registration number.
 PRISMA 2009 Checklist
Di bagian abstrak tidak terdapat keterbatasan

INTRODUCTION
Rationale 3 Describe the rationale for the review in the context of what is already known. 159-160
Menjelaskan alasan untuk meninjau ulang dalam konteks apa yang sudah diketahui
Objectives 4 Provide an explicit statement of questions being addressed with reference to participants, interventions, Tidak
comparisons, outcomes, and study design (PICOS). ditemukan
Tidak adanya perbandingan dari beberapa penelitian terdahulu
METHODS
Protocol and registration 5 Indicate if a review protocol exists, if and where it can be accessed (e.g., Web address), and, if available, provide Tidak
registration information including registration number. ditemukan
Tidak adanya protokol peninjauan yang dapat diakses (mis., Alamat Web)
Eligibility criteria 6 Specify study characteristics (e.g., PICOS, length of follow-up) and report characteristics (e.g., years considered, 162
language, publication status) used as criteria for eligibility, giving rationale.
adanya karakteristik penelitian (mis., PICOS, lama tindak lanjut) dan karakteristik laporan (mis., Tahun
yang dipertimbangkan, bahasa, status publikasi) yang digunakan sebagai kriteria untuk kelayakan,
memberikan alasan.

Information sources 7 Describe all information sources (e.g., databases with dates of coverage, contact with study authors to identify 163
additional studies) in the search and date last searched.
Search 8 Present full electronic search strategy for at least one database, including any limits used, such that it could be Tidak
repeated. ditemukan
Study selection 9 State the process for selecting studies (i.e., screening, eligibility, included in systematic review, and, if applicable, 162
included in the meta-analysis).
Data collection process 10 Describe method of data extraction from reports (e.g., piloted forms, independently, in duplicate) and any processes 164-165
for obtaining and confirming data from investigators.
Data items 11 List and define all variables for which data were sought (e.g., PICOS, funding sources) and any assumptions and 162
simplifications made.
Risk of bias in individual 12 Describe methods used for assessing risk of bias of individual studies (including specification of whether this was 163-165
studies done at the study or outcome level), and how this information is to be used in any data synthesis.
Summary measures 13 State the principal summary measures (e.g., risk ratio, difference in means). 166
Synthesis of results 14 Describe the methods of handling data and combining results of studies, if done, including measures of consistency 166
(e.g., I2) for each meta-analysis.

Page 1 of 2
 PRISMA 2009 Checklist
Reported
Section/topic # Checklist item
on page #
Risk of bias across studies 15 Specify any assessment of risk of bias that may affect the cumulative evidence (e.g., publication bias, selective Tidak
reporting within studies). ditemukan
Additional analyses 16 Describe methods of additional analyses (e.g., sensitivity or subgroup analyses, meta-regression), if done, indicating Tidak
which were pre-specified. ditemukan
RESULTS
Study selection 17 Give numbers of studies screened, assessed for eligibility, and included in the review, with reasons for exclusions at 166-168
each stage, ideally with a flow diagram.
Study characteristics 18 For each study, present characteristics for which data were extracted (e.g., study size, PICOS, follow-up period) and 167
provide the citations.
Risk of bias within studies 19 Present data on risk of bias of each study and, if available, any outcome level assessment (see item 12). 168
Results of individual studies 20 For all outcomes considered (benefits or harms), present, for each study: (a) simple summary data for each Tidak
intervention group (b) effect estimates and confidence intervals, ideally with a forest plot. ditemukan
Synthesis of results 21 Present results of each meta-analysis done, including confidence intervals and measures of consistency. Tidak
ditemukan
Risk of bias across studies 22 Present results of any assessment of risk of bias across studies (see Item 15). Tidak
ditemukan
Additional analysis 23 Give results of additional analyses, if done (e.g., sensitivity or subgroup analyses, meta-regression [see Item 16]). Tidak
ditemukan
DISCUSSION
Summary of evidence 24 Summarize the main findings including the strength of evidence for each main outcome; consider their relevance to 167-168
key groups (e.g., healthcare providers, users, and policy makers).
Limitations 25 Discuss limitations at study and outcome level (e.g., risk of bias), and at review-level (e.g., incomplete retrieval of 168
identified research, reporting bias).
Conclusions 26 Provide a general interpretation of the results in the context of other evidence, and implications for future research. 167-168
FUNDING
Funding 27 Describe sources of funding for the systematic review and other support (e.g., supply of data); role of funders for the Tidak
systematic review. ditemukan

From: Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, The PRISMA Group (2009). Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement. PLoS Med 6(7): e1000097.
doi:10.1371/journal.pmed1000097
For more information, visit: www.prisma-statement.org.
Page 2 of 2
 PRISMA 2009 Checklist

Reported
Section/topic # Checklist item
on page #
TITLE
Title 1 Identify the report as a systematic review, meta-analysis, or both. 69
Performance Tidak memaparkan sistemtika review, penelitian menggunakan metode kualitatif ataupun metode kuantitatif
Measurement Systems in
the Financial Service
Industry: A Comparative
Analysis of Nigerian and
United Kingdom Banks
ABSTRACT
Structured summary 2 Provide a structured summary including, as applicable: background; objectives; data sources; study eligibility criteria, 69
participants, and interventions; study appraisal and synthesis methods; results; limitations; conclusions and
implications of key findings; systematic review registration number.
Di bagian abstrak tidak terdapat keterbatasan
INTRODUCTION
Rationale 3 Describe the rationale for the review in the context of what is already known. 70
 PRISMA 2009 Checklist
Objectives
METHODS
Protocol and registration
Eligibility criteria
Information sources
Search
Study selection
Data collection process
Data items
Risk of bias in individual
studies
Summary measures
Synthesis of results
Section/topic
Risk of bias across studies
Menjelaskan alasan untuk meninjau ulang dalam konteks apa yang sudah diketahui
4 Provide an explicit statement of questions being addressed with reference to participants, interventions, 71-73
comparisons, outcomes, and study design (PICOS).
Perbandingan dari beberapa penelitian terdahulu
5 Indicate if a review protocol exists, if and where it can be accessed (e.g., Web address), and, if available, provide Tidak
registration information including registration number. ditemukan
Tidak adanya protokol peninjauan yang dapat diakses (mis., Alamat Web)
6 Specify study characteristics (e.g., PICOS, length of follow-up) and report characteristics (e.g., years considered, 74-75
language, publication status) used as criteria for eligibility, giving rationale.
adanya karakteristik penelitian (mis., PICOS, lama tindak lanjut) dan karakteristik laporan (mis., Tahun
yang dipertimbangkan, bahasa, status publikasi) yang digunakan sebagai kriteria untuk kelayakan,
memberikan alasan.
7 Describe all information sources (e.g., databases with dates of coverage, contact with study authors to identify 75
additional studies) in the search and date last searched.
8 Present full electronic search strategy for at least one database, including any limits used, such that it could be Tidak
repeated. ditemukan
9 State the process for selecting studies (i.e., screening, eligibility, included in systematic review, and, if applicable, 74-79
included in the meta-analysis).
10 Describe method of data extraction from reports (e.g., piloted forms, independently, in duplicate) and any processes 75-80
for obtaining and confirming data from investigators.
11 List and define all variables for which data were sought (e.g., PICOS, funding sources) and any assumptions and 80
simplifications made.
12 Describe methods used for assessing risk of bias of individual studies (including specification of whether this was 75-78
done at the study or outcome level), and how this information is to be used in any data synthesis.
13 State the principal summary measures (e.g., risk ratio, difference in means). 80
14 Describe the methods of handling data and combining results of studies, if done, including measures of consistency 78
(e.g., I2) for each meta-analysis.
Page 1 of 2
Reported
# Checklist item
on page #
15 Specify any assessment of risk of bias that may affect the cumulative evidence (e.g., publication bias, selective Tidak
reporting within studies). ditemukan
 PRISMA 2009 Checklist
Additional analyses 16 Describe methods of additional analyses (e.g., sensitivity or subgroup analyses, meta-regression), if done, indicating Tidak
which were pre-specified. ditemukan
RESULTS
Study selection 17 Give numbers of studies screened, assessed for eligibility, and included in the review, with reasons for exclusions at 73
each stage, ideally with a flow diagram.
Study characteristics 18 For each study, present characteristics for which data were extracted (e.g., study size, PICOS, follow-up period) and 76-80
provide the citations.
Risk of bias within studies 19 Present data on risk of bias of each study and, if available, any outcome level assessment (see item 12). 80
Results of individual studies 20 For all outcomes considered (benefits or harms), present, for each study: (a) simple summary data for each 75-79
intervention group (b) effect estimates and confidence intervals, ideally with a forest plot.
Synthesis of results 21 Present results of each meta-analysis done, including confidence intervals and measures of consistency. 75-79
Risk of bias across studies 22 Present results of any assessment of risk of bias across studies (see Item 15). Tidak
ditemukan
Additional analysis 23 Give results of additional analyses, if done (e.g., sensitivity or subgroup analyses, meta-regression [see Item 16]). Tidak
ditemukan
DISCUSSION
Summary of evidence 24 Summarize the main findings including the strength of evidence for each main outcome; consider their relevance to 80
key groups (e.g., healthcare providers, users, and policy makers).
Limitations 25 Discuss limitations at study and outcome level (e.g., risk of bias), and at review-level (e.g., incomplete retrieval of Tidak
identified research, reporting bias). ditemukan
Conclusions 26 Provide a general interpretation of the results in the context of other evidence, and implications for future research. 80
FUNDING
Funding 27 Describe sources of funding for the systematic review and other support (e.g., supply of data); role of funders for the Tidak
systematic review. ditemukan

From: Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, The PRISMA Group (2009). Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement. PLoS Med 6(7): e1000097.
doi:10.1371/journal.pmed1000097
For more information, visit: www.prisma-statement.org.
Page 2 of 2
 PRISMA 2009 Checklist

Reported
Section/topic # Checklist item
on page #
TITLE
Title 1 Identify the report as a systematic review, meta-analysis, or both. 241
Performance Tidak memaparkan sistemtika review, penelitian menggunakan metode kualitatif ataupun metode kuantitatif
measurement system for
healthcare processes
ABSTRACT
Structured summary 2 Provide a structured summary including, as applicable: background; objectives; data sources; study eligibility criteria, 241
participants, and interventions; study appraisal and synthesis methods; results; limitations; conclusions and
implications of key findings; systematic review registration number.
Di bagian abstrak tidak terdapat keterbatasan
INTRODUCTION
Rationale 3 Describe the rationale for the review in the context of what is already known. 241
Menjelaskan alasan untuk meninjau ulang dalam konteks apa yang sudah diketahui
Objectives 4 Provide an explicit statement of questions being addressed with reference to participants, interventions, Tidak
comparisons, outcomes, and study design (PICOS). ditemukan
Tidak ada Perbandingan dari beberapa penelitian terdahulu
METHODS
Protocol and registration 5 Indicate if a review protocol exists, if and where it can be accessed (e.g., Web address), and, if available, provide Tidak
registration information including registration number. ditemukan
Tidak adanya protokol peninjauan yang dapat diakses (mis., Alamat Web)
 PRISMA 2009 Checklist
Eligibility criteria 6 Specify study characteristics (e.g., PICOS, length of follow-up) and report characteristics (e.g., years considered, Tidak
language, publication status) used as criteria for eligibility, giving rationale. ditemukan
Tidak adanya karakteristik penelitian (mis., PICOS, lama tindak lanjut) dan karakteristik laporan (mis.,
Tahun yang dipertimbangkan, bahasa, status publikasi) yang digunakan sebagai kriteria untuk kelayakan,
memberikan alasan.
Penelitian hanya bersifat deskriptif

Information sources 7 Describe all information sources (e.g., databases with dates of coverage, contact with study authors to identify Tidak
additional studies) in the search and date last searched. ditemukan
Search 8 Present full electronic search strategy for at least one database, including any limits used, such that it could be Tidak
repeated. ditemukan
Study selection 9 State the process for selecting studies (i.e., screening, eligibility, included in systematic review, and, if applicable, Tidak
included in the meta-analysis). ditemukan
Data collection process 10 Describe method of data extraction from reports (e.g., piloted forms, independently, in duplicate) and any processes Tidak
for obtaining and confirming data from investigators. ditemukan
Data items 11 List and define all variables for which data were sought (e.g., PICOS, funding sources) and any assumptions and Tidak
simplifications made. ditemukan
Risk of bias in individual 12 Describe methods used for assessing risk of bias of individual studies (including specification of whether this was Tidak
studies done at the study or outcome level), and how this information is to be used in any data synthesis. ditemukan
Summary measures 13 State the principal summary measures (e.g., risk ratio, difference in means). Tidak
ditemukan
Synthesis of results 14 Describe the methods of handling data and combining results of studies, if done, including measures of consistency Tidak
(e.g., I2) for each meta-analysis. ditemukan
Page 1 of 2
Reported
Section/topic # Checklist item
on page #
Risk of bias across studies 15 Specify any assessment of risk of bias that may affect the cumulative evidence (e.g., publication bias, selective Tidak
reporting within studies). ditemukan
Additional analyses 16 Describe methods of additional analyses (e.g., sensitivity or subgroup analyses, meta-regression), if done, indicating Tidak
which were pre-specified. ditemukan
RESULTS
 PRISMA 2009 Checklist
Study selection 17 Give numbers of studies screened, assessed for eligibility, and included in the review, with reasons for exclusions at Tidak
each stage, ideally with a flow diagram. ditemukan
Study characteristics 18 For each study, present characteristics for which data were extracted (e.g., study size, PICOS, follow-up period) and Tidak
provide the citations. ditemukan
Risk of bias within studies 19 Present data on risk of bias of each study and, if available, any outcome level assessment (see item 12). Tidak
ditemukan
Results of individual studies 20 For all outcomes considered (benefits or harms), present, for each study: (a) simple summary data for each 242-248
intervention group (b) effect estimates and confidence intervals, ideally with a forest plot.
Synthesis of results 21 Present results of each meta-analysis done, including confidence intervals and measures of consistency. 247
Risk of bias across studies 22 Present results of any assessment of risk of bias across studies (see Item 15). Tidak
ditemukan
Additional analysis 23 Give results of additional analyses, if done (e.g., sensitivity or subgroup analyses, meta-regression [see Item 16]). Tidak
ditemukan
DISCUSSION
Summary of evidence 24 Summarize the main findings including the strength of evidence for each main outcome; consider their relevance to 249
key groups (e.g., healthcare providers, users, and policy makers).
Limitations 25 Discuss limitations at study and outcome level (e.g., risk of bias), and at review-level (e.g., incomplete retrieval of Tidak
identified research, reporting bias). ditemukan
Conclusions 26 Provide a general interpretation of the results in the context of other evidence, and implications for future research. 249
FUNDING
Funding 27 Describe sources of funding for the systematic review and other support (e.g., supply of data); role of funders for the Tidak
systematic review. ditemukan

From: Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, The PRISMA Group (2009). Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement. PLoS Med 6(7): e1000097.
doi:10.1371/journal.pmed1000097
For more information, visit: www.prisma-statement.org.
Page 2 of 2
 PRISMA 2009 Checklist

Reported
Section/topic # Checklist item
on page #
TITLE
Title 1 Identify the report as a systematic review, meta-analysis, or both. 81
A Study of the terdapat sistemtika review, penelitian menggunakan metode kualitatif ataupun metode kuantitatif
Relationship Between a
Successful Enterprise Risk
Management System, a
Performance
Measurement System
and the Financial
Performance of Thai
Listed Companies
ABSTRACT
Structured summary 2 Provide a structured summary including, as applicable: background; objectives; data sources; study eligibility criteria, 81
participants, and interventions; study appraisal and synthesis methods; results; limitations; conclusions and
implications of key findings; systematic review registration number.
Di bagian abstrak tidak terdapat keterbatasan
INTRODUCTION
Rationale 3 Describe the rationale for the review in the context of what is already known. 81-82
Menjelaskan alasan untuk meninjau ulang dalam konteks apa yang sudah diketahui
Objectives 4 Provide an explicit statement of questions being addressed with reference to participants, interventions, Tidak
comparisons, outcomes, and study design (PICOS). ditemukan
Tidak ada Perbandingan dari beberapa penelitian terdahulu
METHODS
 PRISMA 2009 Checklist
Protocol and registration
Eligibility criteria
5 Indicate if a review protocol exists, if and where it can be accessed (e.g., Web address), and, if available, provide Tidak
registration information including registration number. ditemukan
Tidak adanya protokol peninjauan yang dapat diakses (mis., Alamat Web)
6 Specify study characteristics (e.g., PICOS, length of follow-up) and report characteristics (e.g., years considered, Tidak
language, publication status) used as criteria for eligibility, giving rationale. ditemukan
Tidak adanya karakteristik penelitian (mis., PICOS, lama tindak lanjut) dan karakteristik laporan (mis.,
Tahun yang dipertimbangkan, bahasa, status publikasi) yang digunakan sebagai kriteria untuk kelayakan,
memberikan alasan.
Penelitian hanya bersifat deskriptif

Information sources 7 Describe all information sources (e.g., databases with dates of coverage, contact with study authors to identify 84-85
additional studies) in the search and date last searched.
Search 8 Present full electronic search strategy for at least one database, including any limits used, such that it could be 85
repeated.
Study selection 9 State the process for selecting studies (i.e., screening, eligibility, included in systematic review, and, if applicable, Tidak
included in the meta-analysis). ditemukan
Data collection process 10 Describe method of data extraction from reports (e.g., piloted forms, independently, in duplicate) and any processes Tidak
for obtaining and confirming data from investigators. ditemukan
Data items 11 List and define all variables for which data were sought (e.g., PICOS, funding sources) and any assumptions and 86
simplifications made.
Risk of bias in individual 12 Describe methods used for assessing risk of bias of individual studies (including specification of whether this was 86-89
studies done at the study or outcome level), and how this information is to be used in any data synthesis.
Summary measures 13 State the principal summary measures (e.g., risk ratio, difference in means). 90
Synthesis of results 14 Describe the methods of handling data and combining results of studies, if done, including measures of consistency 87-89
(e.g., I2) for each meta-analysis.

Page 1 of 2
Reported
Section/topic # Checklist item
on page #
Risk of bias across studies 15 Specify any assessment of risk of bias that may affect the cumulative evidence (e.g., publication bias, selective Tidak
reporting within studies). ditemukan
Additional analyses 16 Describe methods of additional analyses (e.g., sensitivity or subgroup analyses, meta-regression), if done, indicating Tidak
which were pre-specified. ditemukan
RESULTS
 PRISMA 2009 Checklist
Study selection 17 Give numbers of studies screened, assessed for eligibility, and included in the review, with reasons for exclusions at Tidak
each stage, ideally with a flow diagram. ditemukan
Study characteristics 18 For each study, present characteristics for which data were extracted (e.g., study size, PICOS, follow-up period) and 90
provide the citations.
Risk of bias within studies 19 Present data on risk of bias of each study and, if available, any outcome level assessment (see item 12). Tidak
ditemukan
Results of individual studies 20 For all outcomes considered (benefits or harms), present, for each study: (a) simple summary data for each 89-90
intervention group (b) effect estimates and confidence intervals, ideally with a forest plot.
Synthesis of results 21 Present results of each meta-analysis done, including confidence intervals and measures of consistency. 90
Risk of bias across studies 22 Present results of any assessment of risk of bias across studies (see Item 15). Tidak
ditemukan
Additional analysis 23 Give results of additional analyses, if done (e.g., sensitivity or subgroup analyses, meta-regression [see Item 16]). Tidak
ditemukan
DISCUSSION
Summary of evidence 24 Summarize the main findings including the strength of evidence for each main outcome; consider their relevance to 90
key groups (e.g., healthcare providers, users, and policy makers).
Limitations 25 Discuss limitations at study and outcome level (e.g., risk of bias), and at review-level (e.g., incomplete retrieval of Tidak
identified research, reporting bias). ditemukan
Conclusions 26 Provide a general interpretation of the results in the context of other evidence, and implications for future research. 90
FUNDING
Funding 27 Describe sources of funding for the systematic review and other support (e.g., supply of data); role of funders for the Tidak
systematic review. ditemukan

From: Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, The PRISMA Group (2009). Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement. PLoS Med 6(7): e1000097.
doi:10.1371/journal.pmed1000097
For more information, visit: www.prisma-statement.org.
Page 2 of 2
 PRISMA 2009 Checklist

Reported
Section/topic # Checklist item
on page #
TITLE
Title 1 Identify the report as a systematic review, meta-analysis, or both. 2
Analisis Laporan terdapat sistemtika review, penelitian menggunakan metode kualitatif ataupun metode kuantitatif
Keuangan Dengan
Metode Trend Sebagai
Dasar Menilai Kondisi
Keuangan Di Rumah Sakit
Umum Haji Medan
ABSTRACT
Structured summary 2 Provide a structured summary including, as applicable: background; objectives; data sources; study eligibility criteria, 2
participants, and interventions; study appraisal and synthesis methods; results; limitations; conclusions and
implications of key findings; systematic review registration number.
Di bagian abstrak tidak terdapat keterbatasan
INTRODUCTION
Rationale 3 Describe the rationale for the review in the context of what is already known. 4-5
Menjelaskan alasan untuk meninjau ulang dalam konteks apa yang sudah diketahui
Objectives 4 Provide an explicit statement of questions being addressed with reference to participants, interventions, 5-10
comparisons, outcomes, and study design (PICOS).
Tidak ada Perbandingan dari beberapa penelitian terdahulu
METHODS
Protocol and registration 5 Indicate if a review protocol exists, if and where it can be accessed (e.g., Web address), and, if available, provide Tidak
registration information including registration number. ditemukan
Tidak adanya protokol peninjauan yang dapat diakses (mis., Alamat Web)
Eligibility criteria 6 Specify study characteristics (e.g., PICOS, length of follow-up) and report characteristics (e.g., years considered, Tidak
language, publication status) used as criteria for eligibility, giving rationale. ditemukan
Tidak adanya karakteristik penelitian (mis., PICOS, lama tindak lanjut) dan karakteristik laporan (mis.,
Tahun yang dipertimbangkan, bahasa, status publikasi) yang digunakan sebagai kriteria untuk kelayakan,
 PRISMA 2009 Checklist
memberikan alasan.
Penelitian hanya bersifat deskriptif

Information sources 7 Describe all information sources (e.g., databases with dates of coverage, contact with study authors to identify 12-13
additional studies) in the search and date last searched.
Search 8 Present full electronic search strategy for at least one database, including any limits used, such that it could be 14
repeated.
Study selection 9 State the process for selecting studies (i.e., screening, eligibility, included in systematic review, and, if applicable, Tidak
included in the meta-analysis). ditemukan
Data collection process 10 Describe method of data extraction from reports (e.g., piloted forms, independently, in duplicate) and any processes 14
for obtaining and confirming data from investigators.
Data items 11 List and define all variables for which data were sought (e.g., PICOS, funding sources) and any assumptions and 13
simplifications made.
Risk of bias in individual 12 Describe methods used for assessing risk of bias of individual studies (including specification of whether this was 14-15
studies done at the study or outcome level), and how this information is to be used in any data synthesis.
Summary measures 13 State the principal summary measures (e.g., risk ratio, difference in means). 14
Synthesis of results 14 Describe the methods of handling data and combining results of studies, if done, including measures of consistency 14-15
(e.g., I2) for each meta-analysis.

Page 1 of 2
Reported
Section/topic # Checklist item
on page #
Risk of bias across studies 15 Specify any assessment of risk of bias that may affect the cumulative evidence (e.g., publication bias, selective Tidak
reporting within studies). ditemukan
Additional analyses 16 Describe methods of additional analyses (e.g., sensitivity or subgroup analyses, meta-regression), if done, indicating Tidak
which were pre-specified. ditemukan
RESULTS
Study selection 17 Give numbers of studies screened, assessed for eligibility, and included in the review, with reasons for exclusions at 15-20
each stage, ideally with a flow diagram.
Study characteristics 18 For each study, present characteristics for which data were extracted (e.g., study size, PICOS, follow-up period) and 15-16
provide the citations.
Risk of bias within studies 19 Present data on risk of bias of each study and, if available, any outcome level assessment (see item 12). 20
Results of individual studies 20 For all outcomes considered (benefits or harms), present, for each study: (a) simple summary data for each 15-19
intervention group (b) effect estimates and confidence intervals, ideally with a forest plot.
Synthesis of results 21 Present results of each meta-analysis done, including confidence intervals and measures of consistency. 20
 PRISMA 2009 Checklist

Risk of bias across studies 22 Present results of any assessment of risk of bias across studies (see Item 15). Tidak
ditemukan
Additional analysis 23 Give results of additional analyses, if done (e.g., sensitivity or subgroup analyses, meta-regression [see Item 16]). Tidak
ditemukan
DISCUSSION
Summary of evidence 24 Summarize the main findings including the strength of evidence for each main outcome; consider their relevance to 20-24
key groups (e.g., healthcare providers, users, and policy makers).
Limitations 25 Discuss limitations at study and outcome level (e.g., risk of bias), and at review-level (e.g., incomplete retrieval of 20
identified research, reporting bias).
Conclusions 26 Provide a general interpretation of the results in the context of other evidence, and implications for future research. 22-24
FUNDING
Funding 27 Describe sources of funding for the systematic review and other support (e.g., supply of data); role of funders for the Tidak
systematic review. ditemukan

From: Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, The PRISMA Group (2009). Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement. PLoS Med 6(7): e1000097.
doi:10.1371/journal.pmed1000097
For more information, visit: www.prisma-statement.org.
Page 2 of 2
 PRISMA 2009 Checklist

Reported
Section/topic # Checklist item
on page #
TITLE
Title 1 Identify the report as a systematic review, meta-analysis, or both. 41
APLIKASI ANALISIS terdapat sistemtika review, penelitian menggunakan metode kualitatif ataupun metode kuantitatif
LAPORAN ARUS KAS
DENGAN METODE
VERTIKAL DAN
HORIZONTAL PADA CV
ILHAM TAILOR
YOGYAKARTA
ABSTRACT
Structured summary 2 Provide a structured summary including, as applicable: background; objectives; data sources; study eligibility criteria, 41
participants, and interventions; study appraisal and synthesis methods; results; limitations; conclusions and
implications of key findings; systematic review registration number.
Di bagian abstrak tidak terdapat keterbatasan
INTRODUCTION
Rationale 3 Describe the rationale for the review in the context of what is already known. 41-42
Menjelaskan alasan untuk meninjau ulang dalam konteks apa yang sudah diketahui
Objectives 4 Provide an explicit statement of questions being addressed with reference to participants, interventions, 42
comparisons, outcomes, and study design (PICOS).
Tidak ada Perbandingan dari beberapa penelitian terdahulu
METHODS
Protocol and registration 5 Indicate if a review protocol exists, if and where it can be accessed (e.g., Web address), and, if available, provide Tidak
registration information including registration number. ditemukan
Tidak adanya protokol peninjauan yang dapat diakses (mis., Alamat Web)
Eligibility criteria 6 Specify study characteristics (e.g., PICOS, length of follow-up) and report characteristics (e.g., years considered, Tidak
language, publication status) used as criteria for eligibility, giving rationale. ditemukan
Tidak adanya karakteristik penelitian (mis., PICOS, lama tindak lanjut) dan karakteristik laporan (mis.,
Tahun yang dipertimbangkan, bahasa, status publikasi) yang digunakan sebagai kriteria untuk kelayakan,
memberikan alasan.
 PRISMA 2009 Checklist
Information sources 7 Describe all information sources (e.g., databases with dates of coverage, contact with study authors to identify 43
additional studies) in the search and date last searched.
Search 8 Present full electronic search strategy for at least one database, including any limits used, such that it could be 43
repeated.
Study selection 9 State the process for selecting studies (i.e., screening, eligibility, included in systematic review, and, if applicable, Tidak
included in the meta-analysis). ditemukan
Data collection process 10 Describe method of data extraction from reports (e.g., piloted forms, independently, in duplicate) and any processes 42-43
for obtaining and confirming data from investigators.
Data items 11 List and define all variables for which data were sought (e.g., PICOS, funding sources) and any assumptions and 42-43
simplifications made.
Risk of bias in individual 12 Describe methods used for assessing risk of bias of individual studies (including specification of whether this was 42-43
studies done at the study or outcome level), and how this information is to be used in any data synthesis.
Summary measures 13 State the principal summary measures (e.g., risk ratio, difference in means). 43
Synthesis of results 14 Describe the methods of handling data and combining results of studies, if done, including measures of consistency 42-43
(e.g., I2) for each meta-analysis.

Page 1 of 2
Reported
Section/topic # Checklist item
on page #
Risk of bias across studies 15 Specify any assessment of risk of bias that may affect the cumulative evidence (e.g., publication bias, selective Tidak
reporting within studies). ditemukan
Additional analyses 16 Describe methods of additional analyses (e.g., sensitivity or subgroup analyses, meta-regression), if done, indicating Tidak
which were pre-specified. ditemukan
RESULTS
Study selection 17 Give numbers of studies screened, assessed for eligibility, and included in the review, with reasons for exclusions at 43
each stage, ideally with a flow diagram.
Study characteristics 18 For each study, present characteristics for which data were extracted (e.g., study size, PICOS, follow-up period) and 44
provide the citations.
Risk of bias within studies 19 Present data on risk of bias of each study and, if available, any outcome level assessment (see item 12). 45-46
Results of individual studies 20 For all outcomes considered (benefits or harms), present, for each study: (a) simple summary data for each 45-46
intervention group (b) effect estimates and confidence intervals, ideally with a forest plot.
Synthesis of results 21 Present results of each meta-analysis done, including confidence intervals and measures of consistency. 43-46
Risk of bias across studies 22 Present results of any assessment of risk of bias across studies (see Item 15). Tidak
ditemukan
 PRISMA 2009 Checklist
Additional analysis 23 Give results of additional analyses, if done (e.g., sensitivity or subgroup analyses, meta-regression [see Item 16]). Tidak
ditemukan
DISCUSSION
Summary of evidence 24 Summarize the main findings including the strength of evidence for each main outcome; consider their relevance to 43-46
key groups (e.g., healthcare providers, users, and policy makers).
Limitations 25 Discuss limitations at study and outcome level (e.g., risk of bias), and at review-level (e.g., incomplete retrieval of 46
identified research, reporting bias).
Conclusions 26 Provide a general interpretation of the results in the context of other evidence, and implications for future research. 43-46
FUNDING
Funding 27 Describe sources of funding for the systematic review and other support (e.g., supply of data); role of funders for the Tidak
systematic review. ditemukan

From: Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, The PRISMA Group (2009). Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement. PLoS Med 6(7): e1000097.
doi:10.1371/journal.pmed1000097
For more information, visit: www.prisma-statement.org.
Page 2 of 2

Reported
Section/topic # Checklist item
on page #
 PRISMA 2009 Checklist
TITLE
Title 1 Identify the report as a systematic review, meta-analysis, or both. 94
Analisis Kinerja Keuangan terdapat sistemtika review, penelitian menggunakan metode kualitatif ataupun metode kuantitatif
dan Pelayanan dengan
Kemandirian Rumah Sakit
di RSUD Dr.Abdoer
Rahem Situbondo
ABSTRACT
Structured summary 2 Provide a structured summary including, as applicable: background; objectives; data sources; study eligibility criteria, 94
participants, and interventions; study appraisal and synthesis methods; results; limitations; conclusions and
implications of key findings; systematic review registration number.
Di bagian abstrak tidak terdapat keterbatasan
INTRODUCTION
Rationale 3 Describe the rationale for the review in the context of what is already known. 94
Menjelaskan alasan untuk meninjau ulang dalam konteks apa yang sudah diketahui
Objectives 4 Provide an explicit statement of questions being addressed with reference to participants, interventions, 95
comparisons, outcomes, and study design (PICOS).
ada Perbandingan dari beberapa penelitian terdahulu
METHODS
Protocol and registration 5 Indicate if a review protocol exists, if and where it can be accessed (e.g., Web address), and, if available, provide Tidak
registration information including registration number. ditemukan
Tidak adanya protokol peninjauan yang dapat diakses (mis., Alamat Web)
Eligibility criteria 6 Specify study characteristics (e.g., PICOS, length of follow-up) and report characteristics (e.g., years considered, 95
language, publication status) used as criteria for eligibility, giving rationale.
Terdapat karakteristik penelitian (mis., PICOS, lama tindak lanjut) dan karakteristik laporan (mis., Tahun
yang dipertimbangkan, bahasa, status publikasi) yang digunakan sebagai kriteria untuk kelayakan,
memberikan alasan.

Information sources 7 Describe all information sources (e.g., databases with dates of coverage, contact with study authors to identify 95
additional studies) in the search and date last searched.
Search 8 Present full electronic search strategy for at least one database, including any limits used, such that it could be Tidak
repeated. ditemukan
Study selection 9 State the process for selecting studies (i.e., screening, eligibility, included in systematic review, and, if applicable, Tidak
included in the meta-analysis). ditemukan
 PRISMA 2009 Checklist
Data collection process 10 Describe method of data extraction from reports (e.g., piloted forms, independently, in duplicate) and any processes 95
for obtaining and confirming data from investigators.
Data items 11 List and define all variables for which data were sought (e.g., PICOS, funding sources) and any assumptions and 95-96
simplifications made.
Risk of bias in individual 12 Describe methods used for assessing risk of bias of individual studies (including specification of whether this was 95-96
studies done at the study or outcome level), and how this information is to be used in any data synthesis.
Summary measures 13 State the principal summary measures (e.g., risk ratio, difference in means). 95
Synthesis of results 14 Describe the methods of handling data and combining results of studies, if done, including measures of consistency 95-96
(e.g., I2) for each meta-analysis.

Page 1 of 2
Reported
Section/topic # Checklist item
on page #
Risk of bias across studies 15 Specify any assessment of risk of bias that may affect the cumulative evidence (e.g., publication bias, selective Tidak
reporting within studies). ditemukan
Additional analyses 16 Describe methods of additional analyses (e.g., sensitivity or subgroup analyses, meta-regression), if done, indicating Tidak
which were pre-specified. ditemukan
RESULTS
Study selection 17 Give numbers of studies screened, assessed for eligibility, and included in the review, with reasons for exclusions at 96
each stage, ideally with a flow diagram.
Study characteristics 18 For each study, present characteristics for which data were extracted (e.g., study size, PICOS, follow-up period) and 98
provide the citations.
Risk of bias within studies 19 Present data on risk of bias of each study and, if available, any outcome level assessment (see item 12). 96-98
Results of individual studies 20 For all outcomes considered (benefits or harms), present, for each study: (a) simple summary data for each 96-98
intervention group (b) effect estimates and confidence intervals, ideally with a forest plot.
Synthesis of results 21 Present results of each meta-analysis done, including confidence intervals and measures of consistency. 97-98
Risk of bias across studies 22 Present results of any assessment of risk of bias across studies (see Item 15). Tidak
ditemukan
Additional analysis 23 Give results of additional analyses, if done (e.g., sensitivity or subgroup analyses, meta-regression [see Item 16]). Tidak
ditemukan
DISCUSSION
Summary of evidence 24 Summarize the main findings including the strength of evidence for each main outcome; consider their relevance to 96-98
key groups (e.g., healthcare providers, users, and policy makers).
Limitations 25 Discuss limitations at study and outcome level (e.g., risk of bias), and at review-level (e.g., incomplete retrieval of 98
identified research, reporting bias).
 PRISMA 2009 Checklist
Conclusions 26 Provide a general interpretation of the results in the context of other evidence, and implications for future research. 96-98
FUNDING
Funding 27 Describe sources of funding for the systematic review and other support (e.g., supply of data); role of funders for the Tidak
systematic review. ditemukan

From: Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, The PRISMA Group (2009). Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement. PLoS Med 6(7): e1000097.
doi:10.1371/journal.pmed1000097
For more information, visit: www.prisma-statement.org.
Page 2 of 2

Reported
Section/topic # Checklist item
on page #
TITLE
Title 1 Identify the report as a systematic review, meta-analysis, or both. 553
How Measuring Financial Tidak terdapat sistemtika review, penelitian menggunakan metode kualitatif ataupun metode kuantitatif
Performance
ABSTRACT
 PRISMA 2009 Checklist
Structured summary 2 Provide a structured summary including, as applicable: background; objectives; data sources; study eligibility criteria, 553
participants, and interventions; study appraisal and synthesis methods; results; limitations; conclusions and
implications of key findings; systematic review registration number.
Di bagian abstrak tidak terdapat keterbatasan
INTRODUCTION
Rationale 3 Describe the rationale for the review in the context of what is already known. 553-554
Menjelaskan alasan untuk meninjau ulang dalam konteks apa yang sudah diketahui
Objectives 4 Provide an explicit statement of questions being addressed with reference to participants, interventions, 554
comparisons, outcomes, and study design (PICOS).
Tidk ada Perbandingan dari beberapa penelitian terdahulu
METHODS
Protocol and registration 5 Indicate if a review protocol exists, if and where it can be accessed (e.g., Web address), and, if available, provide Tidak
registration information including registration number. ditemukan
Tidak adanya protokol peninjauan yang dapat diakses (mis., Alamat Web)
Eligibility criteria 6 Specify study characteristics (e.g., PICOS, length of follow-up) and report characteristics (e.g., years considered, 554
language, publication status) used as criteria for eligibility, giving rationale.
Tidak Terdapat karakteristik penelitian (mis., PICOS, lama tindak lanjut) dan karakteristik laporan (mis.,
Tahun yang dipertimbangkan, bahasa, status publikasi) yang digunakan sebagai kriteria untuk kelayakan,
memberikan alasan.
Peneltian versifat tinjauan literatur

Information sources 7 Describe all information sources (e.g., databases with dates of coverage, contact with study authors to identify Tidak
additional studies) in the search and date last searched. ditemukan
Search 8 Present full electronic search strategy for at least one database, including any limits used, such that it could be Tidak
repeated. ditemukan
Study selection 9 State the process for selecting studies (i.e., screening, eligibility, included in systematic review, and, if applicable, Tidak
included in the meta-analysis). ditemukan
Data collection process 10 Describe method of data extraction from reports (e.g., piloted forms, independently, in duplicate) and any processes 554
for obtaining and confirming data from investigators.
Data items 11 List and define all variables for which data were sought (e.g., PICOS, funding sources) and any assumptions and 554-555
simplifications made.
Risk of bias in individual 12 Describe methods used for assessing risk of bias of individual studies (including specification of whether this was 554-555
studies done at the study or outcome level), and how this information is to be used in any data synthesis.
Summary measures 13 State the principal summary measures (e.g., risk ratio, difference in means). 554
 PRISMA 2009 Checklist
Synthesis of results 14 Describe the methods of handling data and combining results of studies, if done, including measures of consistency 554-555
(e.g., I2) for each meta-analysis.

Page 1 of 2
Reported
Section/topic # Checklist item
on page #
Risk of bias across studies 15 Specify any assessment of risk of bias that may affect the cumulative evidence (e.g., publication bias, selective Tidak
reporting within studies). ditemukan
Additional analyses 16 Describe methods of additional analyses (e.g., sensitivity or subgroup analyses, meta-regression), if done, indicating Tidak
which were pre-specified. ditemukan
RESULTS
Study selection 17 Give numbers of studies screened, assessed for eligibility, and included in the review, with reasons for exclusions at 554
each stage, ideally with a flow diagram.
Study characteristics 18 For each study, present characteristics for which data were extracted (e.g., study size, PICOS, follow-up period) and 554
provide the citations.
Risk of bias within studies 19 Present data on risk of bias of each study and, if available, any outcome level assessment (see item 12). 554-555
Results of individual studies 20 For all outcomes considered (benefits or harms), present, for each study: (a) simple summary data for each 554-555
intervention group (b) effect estimates and confidence intervals, ideally with a forest plot.
Synthesis of results 21 Present results of each meta-analysis done, including confidence intervals and measures of consistency. 555
Risk of bias across studies 22 Present results of any assessment of risk of bias across studies (see Item 15). Tidak
ditemukan
Additional analysis 23 Give results of additional analyses, if done (e.g., sensitivity or subgroup analyses, meta-regression [see Item 16]). Tidak
ditemukan
DISCUSSION
Summary of evidence 24 Summarize the main findings including the strength of evidence for each main outcome; consider their relevance to 556
key groups (e.g., healthcare providers, users, and policy makers).
Limitations 25 Discuss limitations at study and outcome level (e.g., risk of bias), and at review-level (e.g., incomplete retrieval of 556
identified research, reporting bias).
Conclusions 26 Provide a general interpretation of the results in the context of other evidence, and implications for future research. 556
FUNDING
Funding 27 Describe sources of funding for the systematic review and other support (e.g., supply of data); role of funders for the Tidak
systematic review. ditemukan

From: Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, The PRISMA Group (2009). Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement. PLoS Med 6(7): e1000097.
doi:10.1371/journal.pmed1000097
 PRISMA 2009 Checklist
For more information, visit: www.prisma-statement.org.
Page 2 of 2

Reported
Section/topic # Checklist item
on page #
TITLE
Title 1 Identify the report as a systematic review, meta-analysis, or both. 1
Examining Financial Tidak terdapat sistemtika review, penelitian menggunakan metode kualitatif ataupun metode kuantitatif
Performance Indicators
for Acute Care Hospitals
ABSTRACT
Structured summary 2 Provide a structured summary including, as applicable: background; objectives; data sources; study eligibility criteria, 1
participants, and interventions; study appraisal and synthesis methods; results; limitations; conclusions and
implications of key findings; systematic review registration number.
Di bagian abstrak tidak terdapat keterbatasan
 PRISMA 2009 Checklist
INTRODUCTION
Rationale 3 Describe the rationale for the review in the context of what is already known. 1-2
Menjelaskan alasan untuk meninjau ulang dalam konteks apa yang sudah diketahui
Objectives 4 Provide an explicit statement of questions being addressed with reference to participants, interventions, 2
comparisons, outcomes, and study design (PICOS).
Tidk ada Perbandingan dari beberapa penelitian terdahulu
METHODS
Protocol and registration 5 Indicate if a review protocol exists, if and where it can be accessed (e.g., Web address), and, if available, provide Tidak
registration information including registration number. ditemukan
Tidak adanya protokol peninjauan yang dapat diakses (mis., Alamat Web)
Eligibility criteria 6 Specify study characteristics (e.g., PICOS, length of follow-up) and report characteristics (e.g., years considered, 3-4
language, publication status) used as criteria for eligibility, giving rationale.
Tidak Terdapat karakteristik penelitian (mis., PICOS, lama tindak lanjut) dan karakteristik laporan (mis.,
Tahun yang dipertimbangkan, bahasa, status publikasi) yang digunakan sebagai kriteria untuk kelayakan,
memberikan alasan.
Peneltian versifat tinjauan literatur

Information sources 7 Describe all information sources (e.g., databases with dates of coverage, contact with study authors to identify Tidak
additional studies) in the search and date last searched. ditemukan
Search 8 Present full electronic search strategy for at least one database, including any limits used, such that it could be Tidak
repeated. ditemukan
Study selection 9 State the process for selecting studies (i.e., screening, eligibility, included in systematic review, and, if applicable, Tidak
included in the meta-analysis). ditemukan
Data collection process 10 Describe method of data extraction from reports (e.g., piloted forms, independently, in duplicate) and any processes 4
for obtaining and confirming data from investigators.
Data items 11 List and define all variables for which data were sought (e.g., PICOS, funding sources) and any assumptions and 3-4
simplifications made.
Risk of bias in individual 12 Describe methods used for assessing risk of bias of individual studies (including specification of whether this was 3-4
studies done at the study or outcome level), and how this information is to be used in any data synthesis.
Summary measures 13 State the principal summary measures (e.g., risk ratio, difference in means). 5
Synthesis of results 14 Describe the methods of handling data and combining results of studies, if done, including measures of consistency 5-7
(e.g., I2) for each meta-analysis.

Page 1 of 2
 PRISMA 2009 Checklist
Reported
Section/topic # Checklist item
on page #
Risk of bias across studies 15 Specify any assessment of risk of bias that may affect the cumulative evidence (e.g., publication bias, selective Tidak
reporting within studies). ditemukan
Additional analyses 16 Describe methods of additional analyses (e.g., sensitivity or subgroup analyses, meta-regression), if done, indicating Tidak
which were pre-specified. ditemukan
RESULTS
Study selection 17 Give numbers of studies screened, assessed for eligibility, and included in the review, with reasons for exclusions at 5-9
each stage, ideally with a flow diagram.
Study characteristics 18 For each study, present characteristics for which data were extracted (e.g., study size, PICOS, follow-up period) and 5-9
provide the citations.
Risk of bias within studies 19 Present data on risk of bias of each study and, if available, any outcome level assessment (see item 12). 6-10
Results of individual studies 20 For all outcomes considered (benefits or harms), present, for each study: (a) simple summary data for each 6-10
intervention group (b) effect estimates and confidence intervals, ideally with a forest plot.
Synthesis of results 21 Present results of each meta-analysis done, including confidence intervals and measures of consistency. 8-10
Risk of bias across studies 22 Present results of any assessment of risk of bias across studies (see Item 15). Tidak
ditemukan
Additional analysis 23 Give results of additional analyses, if done (e.g., sensitivity or subgroup analyses, meta-regression [see Item 16]). Tidak
ditemukan
DISCUSSION
Summary of evidence 24 Summarize the main findings including the strength of evidence for each main outcome; consider their relevance to 10-11
key groups (e.g., healthcare providers, users, and policy makers).
Limitations 25 Discuss limitations at study and outcome level (e.g., risk of bias), and at review-level (e.g., incomplete retrieval of 11
identified research, reporting bias).
Conclusions 26 Provide a general interpretation of the results in the context of other evidence, and implications for future research. 11
FUNDING
Funding 27 Describe sources of funding for the systematic review and other support (e.g., supply of data); role of funders for the Tidak
systematic review. ditemukan

From: Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, The PRISMA Group (2009). Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement. PLoS Med 6(7): e1000097.
doi:10.1371/journal.pmed1000097
For more information, visit: www.prisma-statement.org.
Page 2 of 2
 PRISMA 2009 Checklist

Reported
Section/topic # Checklist item
on page #
TITLE
Title 1 Identify the report as a systematic review, meta-analysis, or both. 134
From Financial Measures Tidak terdapat sistemtika review, penelitian menggunakan metode kualitatif ataupun metode kuantitatif
To Strategic Performance
Measurement System
And Corporate
Sustainability: Empirical
Evidence From Slovakia
ABSTRACT
Structured summary 2 Provide a structured summary including, as applicable: background; objectives; data sources; study eligibility criteria, 134
participants, and interventions; study appraisal and synthesis methods; results; limitations; conclusions and
implications of key findings; systematic review registration number.
Di bagian abstrak tidak terdapat keterbatasan
INTRODUCTION
Rationale 3 Describe the rationale for the review in the context of what is already known. 135
 PRISMA 2009 Checklist
Objectives
METHODS
Protocol and registration
Eligibility criteria
Information sources
Search
Study selection
Data collection process
Data items
Risk of bias in individual
studies
Summary measures
Synthesis of results
Section/topic
Risk of bias across studies
Menjelaskan alasan untuk meninjau ulang dalam konteks apa yang sudah diketahui
4 Provide an explicit statement of questions being addressed with reference to participants, interventions, comparisons, 135-136
outcomes, and study design (PICOS).
ada Perbandingan dari beberapa penelitian terdahulu
5 Indicate if a review protocol exists, if and where it can be accessed (e.g., Web address), and, if available, provide 134
registration information including registration number.
adanya protokol peninjauan yang dapat diakses (mis., Alamat Web)
6 Specify study characteristics (e.g., PICOS, length of follow-up) and report characteristics (e.g., years considered, 135-138
language, publication status) used as criteria for eligibility, giving rationale.
Tidak Terdapat karakteristik penelitian (mis., PICOS, lama tindak lanjut) dan karakteristik laporan (mis.,
Tahun yang dipertimbangkan, bahasa, status publikasi) yang digunakan sebagai kriteria untuk kelayakan,
memberikan alasan.
7 Describe all information sources (e.g., databases with dates of coverage, contact with study authors to identify 140
additional studies) in the search and date last searched.
8 Present full electronic search strategy for at least one database, including any limits used, such that it could be 141
repeated.
9 State the process for selecting studies (i.e., screening, eligibility, included in systematic review, and, if applicable, 142-43
included in the meta-analysis).
10 Describe method of data extraction from reports (e.g., piloted forms, independently, in duplicate) and any processes 142
for obtaining and confirming data from investigators.
11 List and define all variables for which data were sought (e.g., PICOS, funding sources) and any assumptions and 140-141
simplifications made.
12 Describe methods used for assessing risk of bias of individual studies (including specification of whether this was 142-143
done at the study or outcome level), and how this information is to be used in any data synthesis.
13 State the principal summary measures (e.g., risk ratio, difference in means). 142
14 Describe the methods of handling data and combining results of studies, if done, including measures of consistency 142-143
(e.g., I2) for each meta-analysis.
Page 1 of 2
Reported
# Checklist item
on page #
15 Specify any assessment of risk of bias that may affect the cumulative evidence (e.g., publication bias, selective Tidak
reporting within studies). ditemukan
 PRISMA 2009 Checklist
Additional analyses 16 Describe methods of additional analyses (e.g., sensitivity or subgroup analyses, meta-regression), if done, indicating Tidak
which were pre-specified. ditemukan
RESULTS
Study selection 17 Give numbers of studies screened, assessed for eligibility, and included in the review, with reasons for exclusions at 143-147
each stage, ideally with a flow diagram.
Study characteristics 18 For each study, present characteristics for which data were extracted (e.g., study size, PICOS, follow-up period) and 143-147
provide the citations.
Risk of bias within studies 19 Present data on risk of bias of each study and, if available, any outcome level assessment (see item 12). 145-147
Results of individual studies 20 For all outcomes considered (benefits or harms), present, for each study: (a) simple summary data for each 143-147
intervention group (b) effect estimates and confidence intervals, ideally with a forest plot.
Synthesis of results 21 Present results of each meta-analysis done, including confidence intervals and measures of consistency. 143-147
Risk of bias across studies 22 Present results of any assessment of risk of bias across studies (see Item 15). Tidak
ditemukan
Additional analysis 23 Give results of additional analyses, if done (e.g., sensitivity or subgroup analyses, meta-regression [see Item 16]). Tidak
ditemukan
DISCUSSION
Summary of evidence 24 Summarize the main findings including the strength of evidence for each main outcome; consider their relevance to 147-149
key groups (e.g., healthcare providers, users, and policy makers).
Limitations 25 Discuss limitations at study and outcome level (e.g., risk of bias), and at review-level (e.g., incomplete retrieval of 147-149
identified research, reporting bias).
Conclusions 26 Provide a general interpretation of the results in the context of other evidence, and implications for future research. 147-149
FUNDING
Funding 27 Describe sources of funding for the systematic review and other support (e.g., supply of data); role of funders for the Tidak
systematic review. ditemukan

From: Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, The PRISMA Group (2009). Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement. PLoS Med 6(7): e1000097.
doi:10.1371/journal.pmed1000097
For more information, visit: www.prisma-statement.org.
Page 2 of 2
 PRISMA 2009 Checklist

Reported
Section/topic # Checklist item
on page #
TITLE
Title 1 Identify the report as a systematic review, meta-analysis, or both. 2
Financial And Non- Tidak terdapat sistemtika review, penelitian menggunakan metode kualitatif ataupun metode kuantitatif
Financial Performance
Measures In Six Sigma
Initiatives
ABSTRACT
Structured summary 2 Provide a structured summary including, as applicable: background; objectives; data sources; study eligibility criteria, 2
participants, and interventions; study appraisal and synthesis methods; results; limitations; conclusions and
implications of key findings; systematic review registration number.
Di bagian abstrak tidak terdapat keterbatasan
INTRODUCTION
Rationale 3 Describe the rationale for the review in the context of what is already known. 3
Menjelaskan alasan untuk meninjau ulang dalam konteks apa yang sudah diketahui
Objectives 4 Provide an explicit statement of questions being addressed with reference to participants, interventions, 3-4
comparisons, outcomes, and study design (PICOS).
Tidak ada Perbandingan dari beberapa penelitian terdahulu
METHODS
Protocol and registration 5 Indicate if a review protocol exists, if and where it can be accessed (e.g., Web address), and, if available, provide 7
registration information including registration number.
 PRISMA 2009 Checklist
adanya protokol peninjauan yang dapat diakses (mis., Alamat Web)

Eligibility criteria
6 Specify study characteristics (e.g., PICOS, length of follow-up) and report characteristics (e.g., years considered, 7
language, publication status) used as criteria for eligibility, giving rationale.
Terdapat karakteristik penelitian (mis., PICOS, lama tindak lanjut) dan karakteristik laporan (mis., Tahun
yang dipertimbangkan, bahasa, status publikasi) yang digunakan sebagai kriteria untuk kelayakan,
memberikan alasan.

Information sources 7 Describe all information sources (e.g., databases with dates of coverage, contact with study authors to identify 7-11
additional studies) in the search and date last searched.
Search 8 Present full electronic search strategy for at least one database, including any limits used, such that it could be Tidak
repeated. ditemukan
Study selection 9 State the process for selecting studies (i.e., screening, eligibility, included in systematic review, and, if applicable, 8-10
included in the meta-analysis).
Data collection process 10 Describe method of data extraction from reports (e.g., piloted forms, independently, in duplicate) and any processes 11
for obtaining and confirming data from investigators.
Data items 11 List and define all variables for which data were sought (e.g., PICOS, funding sources) and any assumptions and Tidak
simplifications made. ditemukan
Risk of bias in individual 12 Describe methods used for assessing risk of bias of individual studies (including specification of whether this was 11
studies done at the study or outcome level), and how this information is to be used in any data synthesis.
Summary measures 13 State the principal summary measures (e.g., risk ratio, difference in means). 9
Synthesis of results 14 Describe the methods of handling data and combining results of studies, if done, including measures of consistency 10
(e.g., I2) for each meta-analysis.

Page 1 of 2
Reported
Section/topic # Checklist item
on page #
Risk of bias across studies 15 Specify any assessment of risk of bias that may affect the cumulative evidence (e.g., publication bias, selective Tidak
reporting within studies). ditemukan
Additional analyses 16 Describe methods of additional analyses (e.g., sensitivity or subgroup analyses, meta-regression), if done, indicating Tidak
which were pre-specified. ditemukan
RESULTS
Study selection 17 Give numbers of studies screened, assessed for eligibility, and included in the review, with reasons for exclusions at 11-12
each stage, ideally with a flow diagram.
 PRISMA 2009 Checklist
Study characteristics 18 For each study, present characteristics for which data were extracted (e.g., study size, PICOS, follow-up period) and 12
provide the citations.
Risk of bias within studies 19 Present data on risk of bias of each study and, if available, any outcome level assessment (see item 12). 11
Results of individual studies 20 For all outcomes considered (benefits or harms), present, for each study: (a) simple summary data for each Tidak
intervention group (b) effect estimates and confidence intervals, ideally with a forest plot. ditemukan
Synthesis of results 21 Present results of each meta-analysis done, including confidence intervals and measures of consistency. Tidak
ditemukan
Risk of bias across studies 22 Present results of any assessment of risk of bias across studies (see Item 15). Tidak
ditemukan
Additional analysis 23 Give results of additional analyses, if done (e.g., sensitivity or subgroup analyses, meta-regression [see Item 16]). Tidak
ditemukan
DISCUSSION
Summary of evidence 24 Summarize the main findings including the strength of evidence for each main outcome; consider their relevance to 13-14
key groups (e.g., healthcare providers, users, and policy makers).
Limitations 25 Discuss limitations at study and outcome level (e.g., risk of bias), and at review-level (e.g., incomplete retrieval of 14
identified research, reporting bias).
Conclusions 26 Provide a general interpretation of the results in the context of other evidence, and implications for future research. 14
FUNDING
Funding 27 Describe sources of funding for the systematic review and other support (e.g., supply of data); role of funders for the Tidak
systematic review. ditemukan

From: Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, The PRISMA Group (2009). Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement. PLoS Med 6(7): e1000097.
doi:10.1371/journal.pmed1000097
For more information, visit: www.prisma-statement.org.
Page 2 of 2
 PRISMA 2009 Checklist

Reported
Section/topic # Checklist item
on page #
TITLE
Title 1 Identify the report as a systematic review, meta-analysis, or both. 507
The Effects of Hospital- Tidak terdapat sistemtika review, penelitian menggunakan metode kualitatif ataupun metode kuantitatif
Physician Integration
Strategies on Hospital
Financial Performance
ABSTRACT
Structured summary 2 Provide a structured summary including, as applicable: background; objectives; data sources; study eligibility criteria, 507
participants, and interventions; study appraisal and synthesis methods; results; limitations; conclusions and
implications of key findings; systematic review registration number.

INTRODUCTION
Rationale 3 Describe the rationale for the review in the context of what is already known. 508
Menjelaskan alasan untuk meninjau ulang dalam konteks apa yang sudah diketahui
Objectives 4 Provide an explicit statement of questions being addressed with reference to participants, interventions, 508-509
comparisons, outcomes, and study design (PICOS).
Tidak ada Perbandingan dari beberapa penelitian terdahulu
METHODS
Protocol and registration 5 Indicate if a review protocol exists, if and where it can be accessed (e.g., Web address), and, if available, provide 507
registration information including registration number.
adanya protokol peninjauan yang dapat diakses (mis., Alamat Web)
Eligibility criteria 6 Specify study characteristics (e.g., PICOS, length of follow-up) and report characteristics (e.g., years considered, 509
language, publication status) used as criteria for eligibility, giving rationale.
Terdapat karakteristik penelitian (mis., PICOS, lama tindak lanjut) dan karakteristik laporan (mis., Tahun
yang dipertimbangkan, bahasa, status publikasi) yang digunakan sebagai kriteria untuk kelayakan,
 PRISMA 2009 Checklist
memberikan alasan.

Information sources 7 Describe all information sources (e.g., databases with dates of coverage, contact with study authors to identify 508
additional studies) in the search and date last searched.
Search 8 Present full electronic search strategy for at least one database, including any limits used, such that it could be Tidak
repeated. ditemukan
Study selection 9 State the process for selecting studies (i.e., screening, eligibility, included in systematic review, and, if applicable, 513-515
included in the meta-analysis).
Data collection process 10 Describe method of data extraction from reports (e.g., piloted forms, independently, in duplicate) and any processes 515
for obtaining and confirming data from investigators.
Data items 11 List and define all variables for which data were sought (e.g., PICOS, funding sources) and any assumptions and 516
simplifications made.
Risk of bias in individual 12 Describe methods used for assessing risk of bias of individual studies (including specification of whether this was 516-518
studies done at the study or outcome level), and how this information is to be used in any data synthesis.
Summary measures 13 State the principal summary measures (e.g., risk ratio, difference in means). 515-518
Synthesis of results 14 Describe the methods of handling data and combining results of studies, if done, including measures of consistency 518
(e.g., I2) for each meta-analysis.

Page 1 of 2
Reported
Section/topic # Checklist item
on page #
Risk of bias across studies 15 Specify any assessment of risk of bias that may affect the cumulative evidence (e.g., publication bias, selective Tidak
reporting within studies). ditemukan
Additional analyses 16 Describe methods of additional analyses (e.g., sensitivity or subgroup analyses, meta-regression), if done, indicating Tidak
which were pre-specified. ditemukan
RESULTS
Study selection 17 Give numbers of studies screened, assessed for eligibility, and included in the review, with reasons for exclusions at 518-524
each stage, ideally with a flow diagram.
Study characteristics 18 For each study, present characteristics for which data were extracted (e.g., study size, PICOS, follow-up period) and 518
provide the citations.
Risk of bias within studies 19 Present data on risk of bias of each study and, if available, any outcome level assessment (see item 12). 521-524
Results of individual studies 20 For all outcomes considered (benefits or harms), present, for each study: (a) simple summary data for each 521-524
intervention group (b) effect estimates and confidence intervals, ideally with a forest plot.
Synthesis of results 21 Present results of each meta-analysis done, including confidence intervals and measures of consistency. 521-524
Risk of bias across studies 22 Present results of any assessment of risk of bias across studies (see Item 15). 518
 PRISMA 2009 Checklist

Additional analysis 23 Give results of additional analyses, if done (e.g., sensitivity or subgroup analyses, meta-regression [see Item 16]). 518-524
DISCUSSION
Summary of evidence 24 Summarize the main findings including the strength of evidence for each main outcome; consider their relevance to 524-527
key groups (e.g., healthcare providers, users, and policy makers).
Limitations 25 Discuss limitations at study and outcome level (e.g., risk of bias), and at review-level (e.g., incomplete retrieval of 524-527
identified research, reporting bias).
Conclusions 26 Provide a general interpretation of the results in the context of other evidence, and implications for future research. 524-527
FUNDING
Funding 27 Describe sources of funding for the systematic review and other support (e.g., supply of data); role of funders for the Tidak
systematic review. ditemukan

From: Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, The PRISMA Group (2009). Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement. PLoS Med 6(7): e1000097.
doi:10.1371/journal.pmed1000097
For more information, visit: www.prisma-statement.org.
Page 2 of 2
 PRISMA 2009 Checklist

Reported
Section/topic # Checklist item
on page #
TITLE
Title 1 Identify the report as a systematic review, meta-analysis, or both. 24
Reliance on multiple Tidak terdapat sistemtika review, penelitian menggunakan metode kualitatif ataupun metode kuantitatif
performance measures
and manager
performance
ABSTRACT
Structured summary 2 Provide a structured summary including, as applicable: background; objectives; data sources; study eligibility criteria, 24
participants, and interventions; study appraisal and synthesis methods; results; limitations; conclusions and
implications of key findings; systematic review registration number.
Terdapat keterbatasan penelitian

INTRODUCTION
Rationale 3 Describe the rationale for the review in the context of what is already known. 24-26
Menjelaskan alasan untuk meninjau ulang dalam konteks apa yang sudah diketahui
Objectives 4 Provide an explicit statement of questions being addressed with reference to participants, interventions, 26-29
comparisons, outcomes, and study design (PICOS).
Tidak ada Perbandingan dari beberapa penelitian terdahulu
METHODS
Protocol and registration 5 Indicate if a review protocol exists, if and where it can be accessed (e.g., Web address), and, if available, provide 29-35
registration information including registration number.
adanya protokol peninjauan yang dapat diakses (mis., Alamat Web)
Eligibility criteria 6 Specify study characteristics (e.g., PICOS, length of follow-up) and report characteristics (e.g., years considered, 29-35
language, publication status) used as criteria for eligibility, giving rationale.
Terdapat karakteristik penelitian (mis., PICOS, lama tindak lanjut) dan karakteristik laporan (mis., Tahun
yang dipertimbangkan, bahasa, status publikasi) yang digunakan sebagai kriteria untuk kelayakan,
memberikan alasan.

Information sources 7 Describe all information sources (e.g., databases with dates of coverage, contact with study authors to identify 29-35
additional studies) in the search and date last searched.
 PRISMA 2009 Checklist
Search 8 Present full electronic search strategy for at least one database, including any limits used, such that it could be Tidak
repeated. ditemukan
Study selection 9 State the process for selecting studies (i.e., screening, eligibility, included in systematic review, and, if applicable, 29-35
included in the meta-analysis).
Data collection process 10 Describe method of data extraction from reports (e.g., piloted forms, independently, in duplicate) and any processes 29-35
for obtaining and confirming data from investigators.
Data items 11 List and define all variables for which data were sought (e.g., PICOS, funding sources) and any assumptions and 29-35
simplifications made.
Risk of bias in individual 12 Describe methods used for assessing risk of bias of individual studies (including specification of whether this was 29-35
studies done at the study or outcome level), and how this information is to be used in any data synthesis.
Summary measures 13 State the principal summary measures (e.g., risk ratio, difference in means). 29-35
Synthesis of results 14 Describe the methods of handling data and combining results of studies, if done, including measures of consistency 29-35
(e.g., I2) for each meta-analysis.

Page 1 of 2
Reported
Section/topic # Checklist item
on page #
Risk of bias across studies 15 Specify any assessment of risk of bias that may affect the cumulative evidence (e.g., publication bias, selective Tidak
reporting within studies). ditemukan
Additional analyses 16 Describe methods of additional analyses (e.g., sensitivity or subgroup analyses, meta-regression), if done, indicating Tidak
which were pre-specified. ditemukan
RESULTS
Study selection 17 Give numbers of studies screened, assessed for eligibility, and included in the review, with reasons for exclusions at 36-37
each stage, ideally with a flow diagram.
Study characteristics 18 For each study, present characteristics for which data were extracted (e.g., study size, PICOS, follow-up period) and 36-37
provide the citations.
Risk of bias within studies 19 Present data on risk of bias of each study and, if available, any outcome level assessment (see item 12). 36-37
Results of individual studies 20 For all outcomes considered (benefits or harms), present, for each study: (a) simple summary data for each 36-37
intervention group (b) effect estimates and confidence intervals, ideally with a forest plot.
Synthesis of results 21 Present results of each meta-analysis done, including confidence intervals and measures of consistency. 36-37
Risk of bias across studies 22 Present results of any assessment of risk of bias across studies (see Item 15). 36
Additional analysis 23 Give results of additional analyses, if done (e.g., sensitivity or subgroup analyses, meta-regression [see Item 16]). 36-37
DISCUSSION
 PRISMA 2009 Checklist
Summary of evidence 24 Summarize the main findings including the strength of evidence for each main outcome; consider their relevance to 36-37
key groups (e.g., healthcare providers, users, and policy makers).
Limitations 25 Discuss limitations at study and outcome level (e.g., risk of bias), and at review-level (e.g., incomplete retrieval of 36-37
identified research, reporting bias).
Conclusions 26 Provide a general interpretation of the results in the context of other evidence, and implications for future research. 36-37
FUNDING
Funding 27 Describe sources of funding for the systematic review and other support (e.g., supply of data); role of funders for the Tidak
systematic review. ditemukan

From: Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, The PRISMA Group (2009). Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement. PLoS Med 6(7): e1000097.
doi:10.1371/journal.pmed1000097
For more information, visit: www.prisma-statement.org.
Page 2 of 2
 PRISMA 2009 Checklist
Reported
Section/topic # Checklist item
on page #
TITLE
Title 1 Identify the report as a systematic review, meta-analysis, or both. 348
The Effect of terdapat sistemtika review, penelitian menggunakan metode kualitatif ataupun metode kuantitatif
Environmental
Performance And
Corporate Social
Responsibility Disclosure
Towards Financial
Performance (Case Study
to Manufacture,
Infrastructure, And
Service Companies That
Listed At Indonesia Stock
Exchange)
ABSTRACT
Structured summary 2 Provide a structured summary including, as applicable: background; objectives; data sources; study eligibility criteria, 348
participants, and interventions; study appraisal and synthesis methods; results; limitations; conclusions and
implications of key findings; systematic review registration number.
Tidak Terdapat keterbatasan penelitian

INTRODUCTION
Rationale 3 Describe the rationale for the review in the context of what is already known. 348-349
Menjelaskan alasan untuk meninjau ulang dalam konteks apa yang sudah diketahui
Objectives 4 Provide an explicit statement of questions being addressed with reference to participants, interventions, 350-351
comparisons, outcomes, and study design (PICOS).
Tidak ada Perbandingan dari beberapa penelitian terdahulu
METHODS
Protocol and registration 5 Indicate if a review protocol exists, if and where it can be accessed (e.g., Web address), and, if available, provide Tidak
registration information including registration number. ditemukan
Tidak adanya protokol peninjauan yang dapat diakses (mis., Alamat Web)
Eligibility criteria 6 Specify study characteristics (e.g., PICOS, length of follow-up) and report characteristics (e.g., years considered, 350-351
language, publication status) used as criteria for eligibility, giving rationale.
 PRISMA 2009 Checklist
Terdapat karakteristik penelitian (mis., PICOS, lama tindak lanjut) dan karakteristik laporan (mis., Tahun
yang dipertimbangkan, bahasa, status publikasi) yang digunakan sebagai kriteria untuk kelayakan,
memberikan alasan.

Information sources 7 Describe all information sources (e.g., databases with dates of coverage, contact with study authors to identify 351
additional studies) in the search and date last searched.
Search 8 Present full electronic search strategy for at least one database, including any limits used, such that it could be Tidak
repeated. ditemukan
Study selection 9 State the process for selecting studies (i.e., screening, eligibility, included in systematic review, and, if applicable, 351
included in the meta-analysis).
Data collection process 10 Describe method of data extraction from reports (e.g., piloted forms, independently, in duplicate) and any processes 351
for obtaining and confirming data from investigators.
Data items 11 List and define all variables for which data were sought (e.g., PICOS, funding sources) and any assumptions and 350-351
simplifications made.
Risk of bias in individual 12 Describe methods used for assessing risk of bias of individual studies (including specification of whether this was 350-351
studies done at the study or outcome level), and how this information is to be used in any data synthesis.
Summary measures 13 State the principal summary measures (e.g., risk ratio, difference in means). 351
Synthesis of results 14 Describe the methods of handling data and combining results of studies, if done, including measures of consistency 351
(e.g., I2) for each meta-analysis.

Page 1 of 2
Reported
Section/topic # Checklist item
on page #
Risk of bias across studies 15 Specify any assessment of risk of bias that may affect the cumulative evidence (e.g., publication bias, selective Tidak
reporting within studies). ditemukan
Additional analyses 16 Describe methods of additional analyses (e.g., sensitivity or subgroup analyses, meta-regression), if done, indicating Tidak
which were pre-specified. ditemukan
RESULTS
Study selection 17 Give numbers of studies screened, assessed for eligibility, and included in the review, with reasons for exclusions at 352-354
each stage, ideally with a flow diagram.
Study characteristics 18 For each study, present characteristics for which data were extracted (e.g., study size, PICOS, follow-up period) and 352-354
provide the citations.
Risk of bias within studies 19 Present data on risk of bias of each study and, if available, any outcome level assessment (see item 12). 352-354
Results of individual studies 20 For all outcomes considered (benefits or harms), present, for each study: (a) simple summary data for each 352-354
intervention group (b) effect estimates and confidence intervals, ideally with a forest plot.
 PRISMA 2009 Checklist
Synthesis of results 21 Present results of each meta-analysis done, including confidence intervals and measures of consistency. 353
Risk of bias across studies 22 Present results of any assessment of risk of bias across studies (see Item 15). 353
Additional analysis 23 Give results of additional analyses, if done (e.g., sensitivity or subgroup analyses, meta-regression [see Item 16]). 354
DISCUSSION
Summary of evidence 24 Summarize the main findings including the strength of evidence for each main outcome; consider their relevance to 354
key groups (e.g., healthcare providers, users, and policy makers).
Limitations 25 Discuss limitations at study and outcome level (e.g., risk of bias), and at review-level (e.g., incomplete retrieval of Tidak
identified research, reporting bias). ditemukan
Conclusions 26 Provide a general interpretation of the results in the context of other evidence, and implications for future research. 354
FUNDING
Funding 27 Describe sources of funding for the systematic review and other support (e.g., supply of data); role of funders for the Tidak
systematic review. ditemukan

From: Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, The PRISMA Group (2009). Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement. PLoS Med 6(7): e1000097.
doi:10.1371/journal.pmed1000097
For more information, visit: www.prisma-statement.org.
Page 2 of 2

Reported
Section/topic # Checklist item
on page #
TITLE
Title 1 Identify the report as a systematic review, meta-analysis, or both. 296
 PRISMA 2009 Checklist
Using strategic Tidak terdapat sistemtika review, penelitian menggunakan metode kualitatif ataupun metode kuantitatif
performance
measurement systems for
strategy formulation:
Does it work in dynamic
environments?
ABSTRACT
Structured summary 2 Provide a structured summary including, as applicable: background; objectives; data sources; study eligibility criteria, 296
participants, and interventions; study appraisal and synthesis methods; results; limitations; conclusions and
implications of key findings; systematic review registration number.
Tidak Terdapat keterbatasan penelitian

INTRODUCTION
Rationale 3 Describe the rationale for the review in the context of what is already known. 296-297
Menjelaskan alasan untuk meninjau ulang dalam konteks apa yang sudah diketahui
Objectives 4 Provide an explicit statement of questions being addressed with reference to participants, interventions, 297-298
comparisons, outcomes, and study design (PICOS).
Tidak ada Perbandingan dari beberapa penelitian terdahulu
METHODS
Protocol and registration 5 Indicate if a review protocol exists, if and where it can be accessed (e.g., Web address), and, if available, provide 296
registration information including registration number.
Tidak adanya protokol peninjauan yang dapat diakses (mis., Alamat Web)
Eligibility criteria 6 Specify study characteristics (e.g., PICOS, length of follow-up) and report characteristics (e.g., years considered, 302
language, publication status) used as criteria for eligibility, giving rationale.
Terdapat karakteristik penelitian (mis., PICOS, lama tindak lanjut) dan karakteristik laporan (mis., Tahun
yang dipertimbangkan, bahasa, status publikasi) yang digunakan sebagai kriteria untuk kelayakan,
memberikan alasan.

Information sources 7 Describe all information sources (e.g., databases with dates of coverage, contact with study authors to identify 296
additional studies) in the search and date last searched.
Search 8 Present full electronic search strategy for at least one database, including any limits used, such that it could be Tidak
repeated. ditemukan
Study selection 9 State the process for selecting studies (i.e., screening, eligibility, included in systematic review, and, if applicable, 298-301
included in the meta-analysis).
 PRISMA 2009 Checklist
Data collection process 10 Describe method of data extraction from reports (e.g., piloted forms, independently, in duplicate) and any processes 298-301
for obtaining and confirming data from investigators.
Data items 11 List and define all variables for which data were sought (e.g., PICOS, funding sources) and any assumptions and 302-304
simplifications made.
Risk of bias in individual 12 Describe methods used for assessing risk of bias of individual studies (including specification of whether this was 302-304
studies done at the study or outcome level), and how this information is to be used in any data synthesis.
Summary measures 13 State the principal summary measures (e.g., risk ratio, difference in means). 303
Synthesis of results 14 Describe the methods of handling data and combining results of studies, if done, including measures of consistency 303
(e.g., I2) for each meta-analysis.

Page 1 of 2
Reported
Section/topic # Checklist item
on page #
Risk of bias across studies 15 Specify any assessment of risk of bias that may affect the cumulative evidence (e.g., publication bias, selective Tidak
reporting within studies). ditemukan
Additional analyses 16 Describe methods of additional analyses (e.g., sensitivity or subgroup analyses, meta-regression), if done, indicating Tidak
which were pre-specified. ditemukan
RESULTS
Study selection 17 Give numbers of studies screened, assessed for eligibility, and included in the review, with reasons for exclusions at 304-308
each stage, ideally with a flow diagram.
Study characteristics 18 For each study, present characteristics for which data were extracted (e.g., study size, PICOS, follow-up period) and 304-308
provide the citations.
Risk of bias within studies 19 Present data on risk of bias of each study and, if available, any outcome level assessment (see item 12). 304-308
Results of individual studies 20 For all outcomes considered (benefits or harms), present, for each study: (a) simple summary data for each 304-308
intervention group (b) effect estimates and confidence intervals, ideally with a forest plot.
Synthesis of results 21 304-308 304-308
Risk of bias across studies 22 Present results of any assessment of risk of bias across studies (see Item 15). 304-308
Additional analysis 23 Give results of additional analyses, if done (e.g., sensitivity or subgroup analyses, meta-regression [see Item 16]). 304-308
DISCUSSION
Summary of evidence 24 Summarize the main findings including the strength of evidence for each main outcome; consider their relevance to 308-309
key groups (e.g., healthcare providers, users, and policy makers).
Limitations 25 Discuss limitations at study and outcome level (e.g., risk of bias), and at review-level (e.g., incomplete retrieval of 309
identified research, reporting bias).
Conclusions 26 Provide a general interpretation of the results in the context of other evidence, and implications for future research. 308-309
 PRISMA 2009 Checklist
FUNDING
Funding 27 Describe sources of funding for the systematic review and other support (e.g., supply of data); role of funders for the Tidak
systematic review. ditemukan

From: Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, The PRISMA Group (2009). Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement. PLoS Med 6(7): e1000097.
doi:10.1371/journal.pmed1000097
For more information, visit: www.prisma-statement.org.
Page 2 of 2