AI 中文总结
研究材料合成中可重复性问题，对Turkevich法合成AuNPs和CVD法生长MoS2进行系统综述与元分析，通过特定方案和算法筛选大量文献，发现关键参数报告不足、统计分析少，证明系统综述等可助于识别差距并指导可靠合成方案发展。
AI 中文摘要
可重复性仍是材料合成中的重大挑战，尤其是对纳米材料而言，其属性对实验条件高度敏感。本文进行了系统综述和元分析，评估两种广泛使用的合成路线的可重复性：Turkevich法合成金纳米颗粒（AuNPs）和化学气相沉积（CVD）法生长MoS2。采用基于PRISMA的适配方案与改良的SPIDER框架，评估文献中的方法透明度、参数报告和实验一致性。从Scopus和Web of Science检索了超1300篇各案例研究文章，经结构化清单和基于Python的文本分类算法筛选。虽文献众多且普遍认为方法具可重复性，但严格探讨合成可重复性的研究占比小，关键参数常少报告，统计分析罕见，限制了实验室间可比性和可重复性。这些发现表明系统综述和元分析对识别可重复性差距及指导材料科学中更透明可靠合成方案发展的价值。
英文摘要
Reproducibility remains a major challenge in materials synthesis, particularly for nanomaterials whose properties are highly sensitive to experimental conditions. Here, we present a systematic review and meta-analysis evaluating the reproducibility of two widely used synthesis routes: the Turkevich method for gold nanoparticles (AuNPs) and the chemical vapor deposition (CVD) growth of MoS2. An adapted PRISMA-based protocol combined with a modified SPIDER framework was applied to assess methodological transparency, parameter reporting, and experimental consistency across the literature. More than 1,300 articles for each case study were retrieved from Scopus and Web of Science and systematically screened using structured checklists and a Python-based text classification algorithm validated against independent human reviewers. Despite the extensive literature and the widespread perception of these methods as reproducible, only a small fraction of studies rigorously addressed synthesis reproducibility. Critical experimental parameters were frequently underreported, and statistical analyses were rarely included, limiting inter-laboratory comparability and reproducibility. These findings demonstrate the value of systematic reviews and meta-analyses as tools for identifying reproducibility gaps and guiding the development of more transparent and reliable synthesis protocols in materials science.
Comments36 pages, 5 figures, 132 references
