The systematic review is a research article because questions can be concluded from grouped outcomes with or without meta-analysis, unlike a simple review that includes articles selected from the authors' experience.

Why isn't it both?

And really, why does it matter?

We can simply divided review into narrative review and systematic review.

A systematic review and meta-analysis is a type of research article, rather than a review (narrative review). In the scientific point of view, the type of article it is belonging to does not matters. It only matters when your system of promotion gives different points to original article and review.

There are narrative reviews (unsystematic and not transparent) and various types of systematic reviews, which are transparent and all inclusive, i.e. the selection of papers to review is not based on whim or personal preferences.

Among the systematic reviews there are several types, and they can be analyzed in different ways. A meta-analysis is simply one of several methods that can be used to analyze the data. It is therefore, in fact, a weird habit to refer to a study as a 'meta-analysis'. Explanation: If you perform an 'ordinary' research study, you can analyze these data in different ways. Let's say you use the ANOVA to test if differences between groups are significant. Then you would just DO that, you would not call your study an ANOVA study. Same with systematic reviews. The meta-analysis is only a component of your systematic reviews.

Whether you do a systematic review with a meta-analysis or you analyze your data in some other way, you will have one or several research questions that you are trying to answer. When you have a research question and you collect data systematically and deal with them objectively, you are, obviously, doing a research project. A meta-analysis is not a 'better' sort of systematic review. You choose to do a meta-analysis, when the data allow it.

Based on the limited information provided, it really depends on what it is you are doing and how you are presenting it. Typically, a systematic review and meta-analysis study can be classified as a research article.

Thanks everyone for the answer.

Based on my humble experience, meta analysis is simply one of several methods that can be used to analyze the data. In such study you have to review a limited number of research articles that cover a single relationship and then to thus the there results to draw your conclude. the conclusion would be based on several analysis test you have to conduct. Hence, it can be a review article.

Systematic review study. researchers need to follow a certain technique of exclusion and inclusion to identify all research articles that are intended to be cover in their study. The review of those articles will give comprehensive review to the development of the topic. Therefore, such study is 100% review as it does not include any findings but only what have been done and what is needed.