Bibliometric analysis of top 100 systematic reviews and meta-analysis in ophthalmology literature

Vision impairment affects more than 2.2 billion people worldwide, underscoring the need for evidence-based guidance in ophthalmology. This bibliometric analysis mapped the 100 most-cited systematic reviews and meta-analyses in the field to identify highest-impact evidence and how research priorities have evolved. Records were retrieved from the Web of Science Core Collection (15 Jan 2025) and ranked by total citations; bibliometric indicators and visualizations were generated with Bibliometrix (R) and VOSviewer. The 100 articles (1992-2023) accrued over 42.000 citations, with output peaking in 2015-2016. Ten journals, led by Ophthalmology (37 papers), hosted 86% of the studies, while 25 countries, 365 institutions and 658 authors contributed. The United States (26 articles) and United Kingdom (22) dominated volume, yet Australia and Singapore produced exclusively multi-country publications, highlighting reliance on global collaboration. The National University of Singapore, University of Melbourne and Johns Hopkins University were the most productive institutions, and Wong T-Y was the leading author (13 papers, >10 000 citations). Keyword and timeline analyses showed a shift from glaucoma-centric topics to population eye-health metrics and therapeutic evidence from randomized trials. Overall, high-impact ophthalmic evidence is increasingly generated through international networks and concentrated in a few specialist journals, guiding future efforts toward collaborative rigorous research.