Meta-Research in Neuroscience: An Urgent Call to Strengthen the Reliability and Translation of Knowledge into Evidence-Based Neurological Practice

Despite the exponential expansion of neuroscience over recent decades, the field has rarely examined the rigor, transparency, and reproducibility of its own evidence base (research on research). Through a brief systematic exploration of the Scopus database, we identified more than 370,000 neuroscience articles, yet only 15 explicitly addressed meta-research questions, representing a mere 0.004% of the total literature. These few studies were concentrated in high-income countries and limited mainly to neuroimaging and methodological reporting, leaving major subfields such as neuropharmacology, neuropathology, and neuroendocrinology virtually unexplored. This striking imbalance reveals a systemic absence of evidence self-assessment and highlights how neuroscience has advanced without adequate reflection on the validity and translatability of its findings. The lack of meta-research weakens the reliability of neuroscientific evidence, slows the development of shared reporting standards, and risks compromising its translation into evidence-based neurological practice. Strengthening global collaboration, fostering reflexivity, and integrating meta-research into neuroscience are urgent steps toward ensuring that the knowledge generated in laboratories and trials truly supports trustworthy, reproducible, and clinically meaningful clinical healthcare in neurological sciences.