Background: Systematic reviews and meta-analyses play a key role in evidence-based medical decision-making. However, single authorship in these studies may affect the quality and validity of the results. This study aimed to investigate the trends and characteristics of these articles.
Methods: A bibliometric analysis was conducted using the Scopus database to identify systematic reviews and meta-analyses published between 2000 and 2023Article-, author-, and journal-level parameters were assessed. The study followed PRISMA 2020 and PRISMA-S guidelines to ensure transparency in search, screening, and reporting.
Results: Two thousand five hundred four articles were identified, with a trend of increasing publication. The average citations per document was 44. Two-thirds of the journals are hosted in Q1 and Q2. Also, 25% of the authors had more than one systematic review or meta-analysis article. Some authors had published several articles in the same journal. The United States, the United Kingdom, and Saudi Arabia had the highest contributions to these articles. Male authors accounted for 65.33% and female authors for 34.66%.
Conclusion: The persistence of single-authored reviews contradicts international guidelines that emphasize collaborative authorship for methodological rigor. Given that systematic reviews directly inform clinical guidelines and patient care, reinforcing collaborative authorship, along with stricter editorial standards and clearer ethical guidance, is essential to preserve the credibility and reliability of evidence synthesis in evidence-based medicine.
扫码关注我们
求助内容:
应助结果提醒方式:
