Reply to Letter: Merigo et al., "De trop" meta-analyses and systematic reviews in cardiopulmonary resuscitation - A way to rapidly improve authors' citation index at a price of real science.

Abstract

Merigo and colleagues argue that the meta-analyses and systematic reviews published in scientific journals in recent years is excessive, and that the primary goal is often more author-centric rather than to advance science. We agree that author benefits are not trivial, but some are foundational and important, especially for trainees. Trainees learn how to judge the quality of published evidence and create a comprehensive understanding in a selected topic, allowing for skill acquisition and a strong base for later work. This can stoke a future career and better insights by many, starting with the people who create these pieces.