Direct comparison
Prospero Vs Osf: Key Differences & Comparison | CASRAI
PROSPERO and OSF (Open Science Framework) are the two most widely used platforms for registering systematic review and research protocols. They differ significantly in scope, review process, and disciplinary focus. This comparison helps researchers choose the right platform — or understand when to use both.
Side-by-side comparison
| Dimension | PROSPERO | OSF |
|---|---|---|
| What it accepts | Systematic reviews, rapid reviews, and umbrella reviews with health-related outcomes; does NOT accept scoping reviews, literature reviews, or primary studies | Any study type including primary research, scoping reviews, systematic reviews, qualitative studies, and replication studies — across all disciplines |
| Who manages it | Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (CRD), University of York, funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) | Center for Open Science (COS), a nonprofit organisation based in Charlottesville, Virginia, USA |
| Focus / scope | Health, public health, social welfare, education, and crime and justice systematic reviews — all must include at least one health-related outcome | Broad disciplinary scope: psychology, social sciences, biology, medicine, economics, education, and more |
| Review of registration | Each registration is reviewed by CRD staff against eligibility criteria before being made public; takes approximately 10 working days | No editorial review; registrations are time-stamped and made public immediately (or after an author-set embargo period) |
| What is indexed | Indexed by Cochrane; visible in PROSPERO search; referenced in systematic review publications as a transparency measure | Assigns a DOI to each registration; searchable on OSF Registries; visible to other researchers immediately |
| Cost | Free for all users | Free for all users |
| Used for | Health systematic reviews submitted to Cochrane, NICE, WHO, and major clinical journals; required by many health journals as a condition of submission | Primary study preregistration; scoping review protocols; interdisciplinary research; replication studies; also hosts AsPredicted-format registrations |
| Citable persistent identifier | Assigns a PROSPERO registration number (e.g., CRD42024XXXXXX) which serves as a citable reference; some records also carry a DOI | Assigns a DOI immediately on registration (e.g., doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/XXXXX) |
Common questions
FAQ
Can I register a systematic review protocol in both PROSPERO and OSF?+
Yes, and some researchers do. PROSPERO provides domain-specific credibility and Cochrane indexing for health systematic reviews; OSF provides an immediate DOI and is appropriate for broader audiences or interdisciplinary work. If registering in both, clearly cross-reference the registrations. Note that PROSPERO requires you to declare any prior or concurrent registration in another registry.
Which platform do journals require?+
For health and clinical systematic reviews, PROSPERO registration is strongly expected or required by journals such as the BMJ, The Lancet, Cochrane Reviews, JAMA, and many others. For scoping reviews, which PROSPERO does not accept, OSF has become the standard. For primary research preregistration across all disciplines, OSF is the most common platform, with AsPredicted as a simpler alternative for psychology and social science.
Does registering a protocol in PROSPERO or OSF prevent you from publishing the results?+
No. Registration does not prevent publication of results in any journal. The purpose of registration is transparency and bias reduction, not restriction. Registration means there is a public record of what the researchers intended to do, allowing readers and reviewers to compare the pre-specified methods with what was actually done and reported in the final paper.
Going deeper
