Enriching meta-analyses through scoping review, bibliometrics, and alternative impact metrics: Visualizing study characteristics, hidden risk of bias, societal influence, and research translation

We present a framework consisting of three approaches that can enhance meta-analyses: 1) scoping reviews (evidence map), 2) bibliometrics, and 3) alternative impact metrics. These three "enrichment" approaches facilitate the research synthesis of both quantitative and qualitative evidence, along with academic and non-academic influences. While the meta-analysis yields quantitative insights (e.g., overall estimates), the enrichment analyses provide user-friendly summaries of qualitative information on the evidence base. Scoping reviews can visualize study characteristics, unravelling knowledge gaps and methodological differences. Bibliometric analysis offers a visual assessment of the non-independent evidence, such as hyper-dominant authors and countries, and funding sources, potentially informing the risk of bias. Impact metric analysis employs alternative metrics to gauge societal influence and research translation (e.g., policy and patent citations) of studies in the meta-analysis. To illustrate the application of this framework, we provide sample visualizations and R code.