One significant methodological concern could compromise the validity and reproducibility of this review: the absence of a clearly documented literature search and study selection strategy. In the “Author contributions” section, it is noted that “Literature Search: AZ,” but the manuscript does not describe:
Which databases were searched (e.g., PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science).
The time frame of the search.
Search terms and inclusion/exclusion criteria.
How studies were selected for inclusion, especially given the broad scope of the review.
Whether any systematic approach (e.g., PRISMA guidelines) was followed to minimize selection bias.
Without this information, it is difficult to assess whether the review is comprehensive, reproducible, or potentially subject to selection bias. This is especially important when drawing conclusions about the efficacy, limitations, and comparative potential of different therapeutic strategies.