PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 42364666

What's the meta now? More updates on the problems with systematic reviews.

Lesley Uttley·Yuliang Weng·Louise Falzon
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Systematic reviews are intended to provide trustworthy evidence synthesis, yet previous iterations of this living review have identified numerous recurring problems in their conduct and reporting. This article presents the third version and second update of the living systematic review examining issues raised across the academic literature. METHODS: Using consistent eligibility criteria and methods from earlier versions, literature searches were updated to May 2025. Eligible meta-research and editorial articles describing problems with systematic reviews were analyzed to identify emerging themes. Additionally, four basic indicators of methodological quality of the included meta-research were presented across review versions. RESULTS: The update included 209 additional articles. Critically low methodological quality and absence of protocols remained among the most frequently reported issues in systematic reviews across disciplines and journals but notably in evidence underpinning clinical practice guidelines. Spin in abstracts and conflicts of interest continued to be common. Apparent improvements in reporting quality were inconsistent, with modest gains in some full-text reporting but persistent deficiencies in abstracts. Authorship diversity of systematic reviews improved in gender representation but remained geographically concentrated in high-income countries, and primary research included in reviews similarly lacked global representativeness. The issue of misalignment between systematic review evidence bases and global burden of disease bring the total number of problems with systematic reviews to 69. Emerging use of automation and artificial intelligence was variably reported. Descriptive comparison of meta-research articles over the three versions of this living review suggests a greater proportion meeting basic quality indicators in more recent updates. CONCLUSION: Across successive updates, problems with systematic reviews remain widespread and consistent rather than isolated. Incremental reporting improvements coexist with persistent concerns about transparency, bias, and representativeness. Future efforts should prioritize evaluating interventions and aligning research incentives to support genuinely trustworthy evidence synthesis.

Explore related subjects

HumansSystematic Reviews as TopicReview Literature as TopicResearch DesignMeta-Analysis as TopicAuthorshipEvidence-Based MedicineConflicts of interestGlobal research representationMeta-researchResearch integritySystematic reviewTrustworthy evidenceJournal ArticleSystematic Review

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Lesley Uttley, Yuliang Weng, Louise Falzon. 2026-06-27. What's the meta now? More updates on the problems with systematic reviews.. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2026.112393

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2027

Global Genomic Surveillance.

Global genomic surveillance has emerged as a foundational pillar of public health in the twenty-first century, enabling real-time tracking of pathogen evolution and informing outbreak response. This chapter examines the strategic architecture of global genomic surveillance, focusing on its application to arboviruses such as chikungunya virus (CHIKV). It explores the integration of genomic data with epidemiological, clinical, and environmental information within a One Health framework, while addressing critical challenges in governance, equity, and interoperability. The discussion covers the entire genomic surveillance workflow, from sample collection and sequencing to bioinformatic analysis and phylogenetic inference, and highlights the transformative role of artificial intelligence (AI) in predictive surveillance. By analyzing global initiatives, operational barriers, and emerging technologies, this chapter underscores the necessity of sustainable, equitable, and interoperable genomic systems to proactively address current and future infectious disease threats.

Humans↗
PubMed2027

Systematic Dissection of Key Driver Perturbation Signatures in Single Cells via ECCITE-seq.

CRISPR screens, such as expanded CRISPR-compatible cellular indexing of transcriptomes and epitopes by sequencing (ECCITE-seq), enable the simultaneous measurement of transcriptomes, gRNA identity, and cell-surface protein expression at single-cell resolution to systematically interrogate gene function. This platform provides a powerful and scalable experimental approach for validating disease-associated regulators identified by large-scale association studies and other computational methods, including network-based analyses of multi-omics data. Here, as an example application, we describe an ECCITE-seq framework to characterize the transcriptomic consequences of perturbing multiple neuronal key driver genes associated with Alzheimer's disease (AD) in human-induced pluripotent stem cell (hiPSC)-derived neurons. More broadly, by integrating customized pooled gRNA libraries with different CRISPR effectors across multiple cell types, this approach allows for the assessment of the regulatory impact of candidate genes implicated in development and disease processes.

Humans↗
PubMed2027

Identification of Genome-Wide Chromatin Structural Aberration in Cancer by Hi-C Analysis.

Aberrant three-dimensional genome organization is a hallmark of cancer, often driving oncogene activation through mechanisms such as enhancer hijacking. High-throughput chromosome conformation capture (Hi-C) maps these interactions on a genome-wide scale. Unlike earlier dilution-based methods, in situ Hi-C performs proximity ligation within intact nuclei, minimizing random ligation noise and enabling fine-scale structure detection. This chapter describes an optimized in situ Hi-C protocol tailored for cancer cell lines using MboI digestion and biotin-mediated pull-down to generate high-complexity libraries. We further outline a computational workflow that extends beyond standard topological mapping of compartments and topologically associating domains to identify cancer-specific aberrations. Specifically, we focus on detecting chromosomal rearrangements (structural variants) and characterizing the distinct circular topology of extrachromosomal DNA. This integrated experimental and analytical framework provides the necessary tools to dissect the spatial dysregulation underlying tumor evolution.

Humans↗