Objective To evaluate the methodological quality of current disease burden systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Methods The PubMed database was searched by computer from the establishment of the database to October 31, 2023. English literature on systematic review and meta-analysis of disease burden was included, methodological quality assessment tool (AMSTAR2 scale) was used to evaluate the included literature, and data extraction table was made with Excel2021. Results A total of 236 literatures were included. There were a total of 80 literatures before 2017, and the number of literatures published from 2017 to 2023 generally showed an upward trend. The methodological quality evaluation results of 11 literatures were "low", accounting for 4.66%; No literature was rated "high". The research question establishment and inclusion criteria of all 236 articles (100%) adhered to the PICO principles, while none met the requirements of article 10. Entries 5 and 16 exhibited a similarity rate exceeding 70%, whereas entries 3, 13, and 14 demonstrated compliance above the threshold of 70%. Meta-analysis was not conducted in the majority of literature, with qualitative systematic review being predominantly employed. Conclusions The quality of the current burden of disease systematic evaluation research methodology is different. The main problems are the lack of preliminary study protocols, the implementation of meta-analysis, and the risk of bias considered in included studies. It is still necessary to further improve the level of systematic evaluation methodology to promote the long-term development of evidence-based medicine.