BackgroundMeta-analyses are on top of the evidence-based medicine pyramid, yet many of them are not completed after they are begun. Many factors impacting the publication of meta-analysis works have been discussed, and their association with publication likelihood has been investigated. These factors include the type of systematic review, journal metrics, h-index of the corresponding author, country of the corresponding author, funding sources, and duration of publication. In our current review, we aim to investigate these various factors and their impact on the likelihood of publication. A comprehensive review of 397 registered protocols retrieved from five databases was performed to investigate the different factors that might affect the likelihood of publication. These factors include the type of systematic review, journal metrics, h-index of the corresponding author, country of the corresponding author, funding sources, and duration of publication.ResultsWe found that corresponding authors in developed countries and English-speaking countries had higher likelihoods of publication: 206/320 (p= 0.018) and 158/236 (p= 0.006), respectively. Factors affecting publications are the countries of corresponding author (p= 0.033), whether they are from developed countries (OR: 1.9, 95%CI: 1.2–3.1,p= 0.016), from English-speaking countries (OR: 1.8, 95%CI: 1.2–2.7,p= 0.005), update status of the protocol (OR: 1.6, 95%CI: 1.0–2.6,p= 0.033), and external funding (OR: 1.7, 95%CI: 1.1–2.7,p= 0.025). Multivariable regression retains three variables as significant predictors for the publication of a systematic review: whether it is the corresponding author from developed countries (p= 0.013), update status of the protocol (p= 0.014), and external funding (p= 0.047).ConclusionBeing on top of the evidence hierarchy, systematic review and meta-analysis are the keys to informed clinical decision-making. Updating protocol status and external funding are significant influences on their publications. More attentions should be paid to the methodological quality of this type of publication.Supplementary InformationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13643-023-02210-8.