Article type
Year
Abstract
Background:
Last several decades have witnessed the establishment of evidence synthesis, particularly systematic reviews and meta-analyses, as a key component of evidence-based medicine (EBM). Meta-analyses of randomized trials have become more widely accepted by clinicians, researchers and policy makers as a useful tool to critically assess the totality of evidence in a research question. However, little work has been done to identify the great scientific output in this field. Citation analysis has been regarded as a useful method to evaluate the impact of articles in medical field.
Objectives:
We aimed to identify and analyze the most highly cited systematic reviews and meta-analyses, further analyse the main features of 100 most-cited articles in the field excluding the methodology studies.
Methods:
The literature search was performed on 25th November 2019 using Clarivate Analytics ‘Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC)’. The search subjects were ‘systematic review*’, ‘meta-analysis’ and ‘meta-analyses’, ‘meta analysis’, ‘meta analyses’, ‘metaanalysis’, ‘metaanalyses’, ‘pooled analysis’ and ‘pooled review’ in the title section. There was no restriction on the publication year of the article. Using the Clarivate Analytics ‘Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC)’, the selected articles were ranked in descending order on the basis of their citation counts. Each article on the list was reviewed by reading the abstract first by two reviewers independently, methodological studies were excluded, and finally, a unanimous decision was made on the list of the top 100 most-cited publications from the systematic reviews and meta-analyses that were included. VOSviewer (Centre for Science and Technology Studies, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands) and CiteSpace (Chaomei Chen, China) were used to make visualization mapping in this paper.
Results:
A total of 207,673 papers were identified in the initial search, with 60,248 published as ‘article’ and 97,129 classified as ‘review’. Of those, 13,177 articles were cited more than 100 times. After excluding methodological studies about systematic reviews and/or meta-analyses, the top 100 most-cited publications were included. More information about main features of 100 most-cited articles are in progress.
Conclusions:
Our study is ongoing.
Patient or healthcare consumer involvement:
Not applicable
Last several decades have witnessed the establishment of evidence synthesis, particularly systematic reviews and meta-analyses, as a key component of evidence-based medicine (EBM). Meta-analyses of randomized trials have become more widely accepted by clinicians, researchers and policy makers as a useful tool to critically assess the totality of evidence in a research question. However, little work has been done to identify the great scientific output in this field. Citation analysis has been regarded as a useful method to evaluate the impact of articles in medical field.
Objectives:
We aimed to identify and analyze the most highly cited systematic reviews and meta-analyses, further analyse the main features of 100 most-cited articles in the field excluding the methodology studies.
Methods:
The literature search was performed on 25th November 2019 using Clarivate Analytics ‘Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC)’. The search subjects were ‘systematic review*’, ‘meta-analysis’ and ‘meta-analyses’, ‘meta analysis’, ‘meta analyses’, ‘metaanalysis’, ‘metaanalyses’, ‘pooled analysis’ and ‘pooled review’ in the title section. There was no restriction on the publication year of the article. Using the Clarivate Analytics ‘Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC)’, the selected articles were ranked in descending order on the basis of their citation counts. Each article on the list was reviewed by reading the abstract first by two reviewers independently, methodological studies were excluded, and finally, a unanimous decision was made on the list of the top 100 most-cited publications from the systematic reviews and meta-analyses that were included. VOSviewer (Centre for Science and Technology Studies, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands) and CiteSpace (Chaomei Chen, China) were used to make visualization mapping in this paper.
Results:
A total of 207,673 papers were identified in the initial search, with 60,248 published as ‘article’ and 97,129 classified as ‘review’. Of those, 13,177 articles were cited more than 100 times. After excluding methodological studies about systematic reviews and/or meta-analyses, the top 100 most-cited publications were included. More information about main features of 100 most-cited articles are in progress.
Conclusions:
Our study is ongoing.
Patient or healthcare consumer involvement:
Not applicable