Systematic reviews, especially those that include meta-analysis, are the designs that provide the highest level of evidence. However, like other research designs, they can present with low quality reports that undermine the contribution they can make to readers, generating doubts about their validity. To address this situation, various actors in the biomedical sciences developed in the mid 1990s the QUORUM statement, consisting of 18 items grouped into six domains, with the aim of improving the quality of reports of meta-analyzes. In 2009 the same group published the PRISMA statement as an evolution of the previous one, allowing conducting systematic reviews of randomized clinical trials and other types of design, consisting of 7 domains with 27 items. Like other checklists, their impact in the practice has been variable, but certainly contributes to the improvement of the report. This article describes both checklists for use by the authors of the Revista Chilena de Cirugía, in order to achieve an improvement of their articles in a simple and efficient way.