ArticleJournal of clinical sleep medicine : JCSM : official publication of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine2021
Publication of meta-analyses in sleep medicine: a scoping review.
Article in Journal of clinical sleep medicine : JCSM : official publication of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- High-quality research is needed much more than commonly published (low-quality) meta-analyses.Journal of clinical sleep medicine : JCSM : official publication of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine · 2021Article
- High-quality research is needed in sleep medicine, regardless of the methodological design.Journal of clinical sleep medicine : JCSM : official publication of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
STUDY
objectivesSleep research has grown substantially in recent decades, producing a large amount of data and an increasing number of meta-analyses. This study sought to establish the volume of meta-analyses in this area and assess how this level of material has developed over time.
methodsA bibliographic search of the Web of Science database was conducted (1945-2019). The total number of articles and the total number of meta-analyses were extracted for both sleep medicine and a combination of 6 other medical specialties (cardiology, neurology, psychiatry, pulmonology, otorhinolaryngology, and pediatrics).
resultsA total of 262,384 articles and 1,152 meta-analyses related to sleep medicine were identified. Considering the whole period under analysis, meta-analyses represented 0.44% of the total number of sleep medicine-related articles. Throughout this period, the proportion of meta-analyses published has been increasing in both sleep medicine and the other fields, but it is greater in the other fields. In 2019, meta-analyses in sleep medicine represented 1.10% of the publication output in this area but represented 1.62% of the other areas. However, sleep medicine's growth rate has been consistently higher than in the other fields. The United States, China, and the United Kingdom have been the top meta-analysis producers.
conclusionsMeta-analyses in sleep medicine are underused. As a recent medical field, sleep medicine has more potential to grow and is likely to grow faster than other fields. Researchers should be encouraged to perform and publish meta-analyses on sleep medicine, as long as the analyses are reasonable and feasible from methodological, statistical. and practical perspectives.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.