Background Clinical research on exercise-based home pulmonary rehabilitation (HPR) effectiveness in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) treatment is rising, as are associated systematic reviews/meta-analyses (SRs/MAs). However, different SRs/MAs vary in outcome indicators, analysis methodologies, literature quality, and findings. This overview aimed to describe the findings of these SRs/MAs and assess their methodological quality. Methods From inception until April 2022, we searched PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), and Wan Fang. Two researchers searched these SRs/MAs separately, collected the data, and cross-checked it using predetermined rules. The Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews 2 (AMSTAR 2) was used to evaluate the methodological quality of each contained SR/MA. The evidence was assessed using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses 2009 (PRISMA-2009). The Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) was used to determine the validity of the results. Results A total of 433 records were found, with 44 chosen for full-text review. There were 11 SRs/MAs that matched the inclusion criteria. Our overview included studies published from 2010 to 2022. According to the AMSTAR 2 tool, one had low methodological quality, while the other 10 SRs/MAs had very low quality. The PRISMA statement revealed a low rate of complete reporting for eight items. The GRADE tool, on the other hand, revealed that the evidence quality for most outcomes was very low to moderate. Conclusion According to current research, exercise-based HPR may benefit COPD patients. Nevertheless, this finding is restricted by the low quality of the included SRs/MAs. And more high-quality and large-sample studies are needed in the future. Prospero ID: CRD42022322768. https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/#recordDetails