Background and aims There has been a rapid rise in systematic reviews and meta-analyses (SR/MAs) conducted on the association between air pollution exposure during pregnancy and the risk of preterm birth in recent years. Few studies have examined differences in their quality and if they have provided additional insight into the field. This study analysed previous SR/MAs to explore their practices and identify gaps and opportunities for the research field. This work was done to determine if an upcoming SR/MA was needed. Methods A literature search using major English and Chinese databases was performed to find SR/MAs published from 2010 onwards. Information regarding publication date, methods of quality assessment, consideration of population overlap, and primary studies included in their analysis were extracted and compared. Results Seventeen SR/MAs, which included thirteen MAs were conducted from 2010 onwards. A large variety of quality assessment tools were used, but the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was the most common (n=6). Seven MAs explicitly mentioned that they took population overlap into account. Four SR/MAs were found in 2021 alone, but three did not examine the whole literature and focused on specific study designs or exposure assessment methods. They were thus unable to build on finding of previous work due to exclusion of studies that were included in other SR/MAs. Conclusions A considerable number of SR/MAs provided limited addition to the field as they were conducted without sufficient rigour. This may hinder coming to a consensus on the effect estimate of interest and overlook field-specific biases. Therefore, a new SR/MA with improvements in transparency in reporting, replicability of findings, and quality assessment of studies is required. The protocol of this SR/MA is now registered on PROSPERO and will begin in due course. Keywords Maternal exposure; preterm birth; meta-analysis; birth outcomes, air pollution; pregnancy