Survey of systematic reviews and meta-analyses published in ophthalmology
- 1Joint Shantou International Eye Center, Shantou University & The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shantou, China
- 2Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong
- 3Centre for Eye Research Australia, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
- Correspondence to Dr Vishal Jhanji, Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, The Chinese University of Hong Kong 123456, Hong Kong;
Contributors HC and VJ contributed equally to the study.
- Accepted 5 March 2012
- Published Online First 24 March 2012
Purpose To analyse the types of systematic reviews and meta-analyses published in the field of ophthalmology.
Methods The systematic reviews and meta-analysis in ophthalmology published in peer-reviewed journals were retrieved. The distribution of systematic reviews and meta-analyses in various ophthalmic subspecialties, type of study and country of origin were determined.
Results A total of 533 records were identified as systematic reviews and meta-analysis in ophthalmology. Overall, retina and glaucoma were the two major subspecialties accounting for 35% and 21% of the published systematic reviews and meta-analyses, respectively. The major topics published in retina were age-related macular degeneration (37%), tumours (14%), and diabetic retinopathy (12%). More than half (56%) the systematic reviews and meta-analyses were interventional. The author affiliations of these studies were largely from the USA (30%) and the UK (22%). About 60% of the systematic reviews and meta-analyses were published in ophthalmology journals, followed by the Cochrane Library (15.75%) and other non-ophthalmic journals (25.14%), respectively. The number of publications increased from 3 per year in 1994 to almost 100 per year in 2010.
Conclusions The number of published systematic reviews and meta-analyses has been increasing progressively over the past few years. Retina and glaucoma are the two most commonly published topics. Non-ophthalmology journals form a sizeable proportion of avenues for ophthalmic publications.
- Systematic review
- cochrane database
Funding Dr Haoyu Chen is supported by grants from the National Nature Science Foundation of China, Guangdong Science and Technology Project, Guangdong Medical Research Foundation, Science and Technology Project of Shantou City, China and, the Research Fund of Joint Shantou International Eye Center.
Competing interests None.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.