Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2025 Oct;135(4):1119-1121.
doi: 10.1016/j.bja.2025.06.035. Epub 2025 Aug 5.

Authorship trends in systematic reviews: a 30-year analysis in anaesthesia and pain medicine

Alessandro De Cassai  1 , Burhan Dost  2 , Annalisa Boscolo  3 , Paolo Navalesi  4
Affiliations

Authorship trends in systematic reviews: a 30-year analysis in anaesthesia and pain medicine

Alessandro De Cassai et al. Br J Anaesth. 2025 Oct.
No abstract available

Keywords: anaesthesia; ethics; metrics; pain medicine; scientometric; systematic review.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declaration of interest The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1
Boxplots displaying the distribution of the number of authors per year. The box represents the interquartile range (IQR), with the horizontal line indicating the median. Whiskers extend to the minimum and maximum values within 1.5 times the IQR. Purple points denote outliers. Blue dots represent the mean number of authors for each year. The total number of observations (n) is reported beneath each box. Data displayed in this graph are available in the Supplementary Material.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. De Cassai A., Boscolo A., Zarantonello F., et al. Enhancing study quality assessment: an in-depth review of risk of bias tools for meta-analysis-a comprehensive guide for anesthesiologists. J Anesth Analg Crit Care. 2023;3:44. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Gülen S., Fonnes S., Andresen K., Rosenberg J. Increasing number of authors in Cochrane reviews. J Evid Based Med. 2020;13:34–41. - PubMed
    1. Andersen M.Z., Zeinert P., Rosenberg J., Fonnes S. Comparative analysis of Cochrane and non-Cochrane reviews over three decades. Syst Rev. 2024;13:120. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Chalmers I., Glasziou P. Avoidable waste in the production and reporting of research evidence. Lancet. 2009;374:86–89. - PubMed
    1. Altman D.G. The scandal of poor medical research. BMJ. 1994;308:283–284. - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources