文献检索文档翻译深度研究
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
邀请有礼套餐&价格历史记录

新学期,新优惠

限时优惠:9月1日-9月22日

30天高级会员仅需29元

1天体验卡首发特惠仅需5.99元

了解详情
不再提醒
插件&应用
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
高级版
套餐订阅购买积分包
AI 工具
文献检索文档翻译深度研究
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2025

How can we address the surge of low-quality systematic reviews and their impact on high journal rejection rates?

作者信息

Santero Marilina, Menai Samanta Díaz

机构信息

Universitat Autònoma Barcelona International Consultant WHO Barcelona España.

Universidad Hospital Italiano de Buenos Aires Buenos Aires Argentina.

出版信息

Colomb Med (Cali). 2024 Dec 30;55(4):e4006597. doi: 10.25100/cm.v55i4.6597. eCollection 2024 Oct-Dec.


DOI:10.25100/cm.v55i4.6597
PMID:40391319
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12087455/
Abstract

Journals have experienced a significant rise in submissions of systematic reviews and other types of reviews that often fall short of acceptable quality standards. These shortcomings typically stem from insufficient rigor in their methodology, reporting, or critical appraisal. As a result, these submissions are frequently rejected raising concerns about the standards authors are following when preparing such work. This growing trend of low-quality reviews not only places a burden on editorial teams but also poses a risk to the scientific community by potentially disseminating flawed or unreliable conclusions. Ensuring that articles maintain high standards is crucial for preserving the integrity of the scientific literature and facilitating evidence-based decision-making. In an effort to address this problem, this viewpoint editorial aims to offer concepts and recommendations on available tools for future authors to improve the quality of their reviews, as well as to guide readers and potential journal reviewers on how to critically interpret these articles.

摘要

相似文献

[1]
How can we address the surge of low-quality systematic reviews and their impact on high journal rejection rates?

Colomb Med (Cali). 2024-12-30

[2]
Consolidated standards of reporting trials (CONSORT) and the completeness of reporting of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published in medical journals.

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012-11-14

[3]
Impact Factors and Prediction of Popular Topics in a Journal.

Ultraschall Med. 2016-8

[4]
Journal instructions to authors submitting veterinary systematic reviews are inconsistent and often inadequate.

Am J Vet Res. 2025-1-30

[5]
Choosing the right journal for your systematic review.

J Eval Clin Pract. 2014-7-5

[6]
The future of Cochrane Neonatal.

Early Hum Dev. 2020-11

[7]
CAse-BAsed REview sTandards (CABARET): Considerations for Authors, Reviewers, and Editors.

J Korean Med Sci. 2024-8-5

[8]
Preparing a Systematic Review for the American Journal of Ophthalmology: Updated Guidance.

Am J Ophthalmol. 2017-10

[9]
Analysis of submissions, editorial and peer-review process, and outcome of manuscripts submitted to the over a 6-month period.

Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol. 2020

[10]
Cervical spondylotic myelopathy: methodological approaches to evaluate the literature and establish best evidence.

Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2013-10-15

本文引用的文献

[1]
Living evidence and adaptive policy: perfect partners?

Health Res Policy Syst. 2023-12-18

[2]
Guidance to best tools and practices for systematic reviews.

Syst Rev. 2023-6-8

[3]
Formulating the Research Question and Framing the Hypothesis.

Respir Care. 2023-8

[4]
Conducting umbrella reviews.

BMJ Med. 2022-11-22

[5]
Introduction to Umbrella Reviews as a Useful Evidence-Based Practice.

J Lipid Atheroscler. 2023-1

[6]
Citationchaser: A tool for transparent and efficient forward and backward citation chasing in systematic searching.

Res Synth Methods. 2022-7

[7]
Development of literature search strategies for evidence syntheses: pros and cons of incorporating text mining tools and objective approaches.

BMJ Evid Based Med. 2023-4

[8]
The web-based "Right Review" tool asks reviewers simple questions to suggest methods from 41 knowledge synthesis methods.

J Clin Epidemiol. 2022-7

[9]
Where to prospectively register a systematic review.

Syst Rev. 2022-1-8

[10]
COVID-19 false dichotomies and a comprehensive review of the evidence regarding public health, COVID-19 symptomatology, SARS-CoV-2 transmission, mask wearing, and reinfection.

BMC Infect Dis. 2021-7-27

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

推荐工具

医学文档翻译智能文献检索