OBJECTIVE：To evaluate the methodological bias of liver-protective drugs in the treatment of drug-induced liver injury （DILI） and reliability of its conclusions. METHODS： Retrieved from Cochrane Library，PubMed， CJFD， CBM and Wanfang database， systematic reviews about the liver-protective drugs in the treatment of DILI were researched. AMSTAR scale evaluation was included for the methodological quality of systematic review， and the GRADE system was applied for evidence quality assessment of included outcomes. RESULTS：Totally 7 systematic reviews were enrolled， in which the efficacy differences of 7 reviews between liver-protective drugs group and control group （blank control or other  liver-protective drugs）in the treatment of DILI were compared， and safety of 1 systematic review was analyzed. The total effective rate of glutathione group was significantly superior to control group（P＜0.001）； in respect of reducing ALT and TBIL levels， tiopronin group and ademetionine group were superior to control group（P＜0.001）； tiopronin group and silymarin group were superior to controlgroup in reducing AST level（P＜0.001）； the incidence rate of ADR of diammonium glycyrrhizinate in the treatment of DILI had no significant difference from other liver-protective drugs（P＝0.13）. The average AMSTAR score of 7 systematic reviews was 4.43， of which 3 （42.86％） were low quality and 4 （57.14％） were medium quality. Among the 28 outcomes included in 7 systematic reviews， 78.57％（22）outcomes were graded as “low” or “very low” quality. CONCLUSIONS： Some liver-protective drugs makes an significant improvement in liver biochemical indicators for patients with DILI with good short-term safety.However，the methodological quality of systematic reviews is poor on the whole， as well as low quality of evidence.Thus， physicians should apply the evidence to make decision with caution.