Van Hoving, D. J.Chipps, JenniferJaquet, G.2014-11-182014-11-182014Van Hoving, D.J., Chipps, J., and Jaquet, G. (2014). Resource tiered reviews – a provisional reporting checklist. African Journal of Emergency Medicine, 4 (3): 99–1012211-419Xhttp://hdl.handle.net/10566/1306AFJEM is committed to publishing review articles that will benefit acute care providers, independent of the resources available to them. As a result we have compiled a checklist aimed specifically at best evidence in the resource-restricted setting (Table 1). The aim is to guide authors in producing a report which is a combination between a clinical guideline and a systematic review. Best available evidence, using a transparent and systematic approach to find and evaluate relevant studies, is still key; but with additional focus on resource availability. In effect it will be more rigorous than a narrative review but less time-consuming than a systematic review or meta-analysis. In order to apply the content to different resource levels, authors are advised to start by describing the very best evidence available; then assume the resources for this level are not available and describe the next tier of evidence until all options are exhausted. For example, if we return to our patient with chest pain: the recommended treatment for a patient with STEMI is primary percutaneous coronary intervention; if this treatment is not available, then thrombolytics should be considered; if that is not available then antiplatelet therapy and anticoagulation should be used, and so on and so forth.enThis is an author final version of an article published by Elsevier. It may be freely used with acknowledgement of the source.Systematic reviewLow resource settingsArticle