Abstract
Introduction
Systematic reviews consolidate evidence and drive clinical practice guidelines, cost-effective analyses, and policy decisions; therefore, their annual publication rate has increased significantly. We used bibliometric analysis to identify research trends, the most searched topics, authors and organizations productivity and collaboration, the research network, and research gaps by examining keywords frequency and systematic reviews distribution.
Methods
We searched the PubMed database for systematic reviews using the systematic review filter described by Salvador-Oliván and coauthors, which has higher recall than the PubMed SR filter. The search period was from 1934 until February 3, 2023. Microsoft Excel and the VOSviewer application were used for analyzing yearly trends, institutions, authors, and keywords, as well as to create tables and network figures.
Results
A total of 378,685 articles were published. The number of articles published has been rising steadily during the past five years. The University of Toronto and McMaster University in Canada (n = 1415 and n = 1386) were the leading contributory universities. “Genetic predisposition to disease”, “postoperative complications”, “neoplasm”, “stroke”, and “covid-19” were the top 5 occurring keywords that are particular to a specialty in systematic reviews.
Conclusion
This bibliometric research examined systematic reviews, publication trends, the majority of publishing disciplines, authors and organizations productivity, and collaborative efforts. The results of this study could prove to be an invaluable resource for researchers, policymakers, and healthcare professionals.
Reference19 articles.
1. Shojania KG, Sampson M, Ansari MT, et al. Updating Systematic Reviews. Health (San Francisco). 2010;(16). Accessed March 4, 2023. http://europepm c.org/books/NBK44099
2. Bero LA, Grilli R, Grimshaw JM, Harvey E, Oxman AD, Thomson MA. Closing the gap between research and practice: an overview of systematic reviews of interventions to promote the implementation of research findings. BMJ. 1998;317(7156):465-468. doi:10.1136/bmj.317.7156.465
3. Oxman AD, Cook DJ, Guyatt GH, et al. Users’ Guides to the Medical Literature: VI. How to Use an Overview. JAMA. 1994;272(17):1367-1371. doi:10.100 1/jama.1994.03520170077040
4. Scholten RJPM, Kremer LCM. [Systemic reviews as a basis for guidelines]. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd. 2004;148(6):262-264. Accessed March 4, 2023. https://europepmc.org/article/med/15004951
5. Haines A, Jones R. Implementing findings of research. BMJ. 1994;308(6942):1488-1492. doi:10.113 6/bmj.308.6942.1488
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献