Literature DB >> 32727637

Importance of Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses of Animal Studies: Challenges for Animal-to-Human Translation.

Zahra Bahadoran1, Parvin Mirmiran2, Khosrow Kashfi3, Asghar Ghasemi4.   

Abstract

Results of animal experiments are used for understanding the pathophysiology of diseases, assessing safety and efficacy of newly developed drugs, and monitoring environmental health hazards among others. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of animal data are important tools to condense animal evidence and translate the data into practical clinical applications. Such studies are conducted to explore heterogeneity, to generate new hypotheses about pathophysiology and treatment, to design new clinical trial modalities, and to test the efficacy and the safety of the various interventions. Here, we provide an overview regarding the importance of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of animal data and discuss common challenges and their potential solutions. Current evidence highlights various problems and challenges that surround these issues, including lack of generalizability of data obtained from animal models, failure in translating data obtained from animals to humans, poor experimental design and the reporting of the animal studies, heterogeneity of the data collected, and methodologic weaknesses of animal systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of animal studies can catalyze translational processes more effectively if they focus on a well-defined hypothesis along with addressing clear inclusion and exclusion criteria, publication bias, heterogeneity of the data, and a coherent and well-balanced assessment of studies' quality.

Entities:  

Year:  2020        PMID: 32727637      PMCID: PMC7479780          DOI: 10.30802/AALAS-JAALAS-19-000139

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci        ISSN: 1559-6109            Impact factor:   1.232


  82 in total

Review 1.  Why most discovered true associations are inflated.

Authors:  John P A Ioannidis
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  2008-09       Impact factor: 4.822

Review 2.  Comparison of treatment effects between animal experiments and clinical trials: systematic review.

Authors:  Pablo Perel; Ian Roberts; Emily Sena; Philipa Wheble; Catherine Briscoe; Peter Sandercock; Malcolm Macleod; Luciano E Mignini; Pradeep Jayaram; Khalid S Khan
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2006-12-15

Review 3.  Power failure: why small sample size undermines the reliability of neuroscience.

Authors:  Katherine S Button; John P A Ioannidis; Claire Mokrysz; Brian A Nosek; Jonathan Flint; Emma S J Robinson; Marcus R Munafò
Journal:  Nat Rev Neurosci       Date:  2013-04-10       Impact factor: 34.870

Review 4.  Flaws in animal studies exploring statins and impact on meta-analysis.

Authors:  Lorenzo Moja; Valentina Pecoraro; Laura Ciccolallo; Luigi Dall'Olmo; Gianni Virgili; Silvio Garattini
Journal:  Eur J Clin Invest       Date:  2014-05-06       Impact factor: 4.686

Review 5.  On determining sample size in experiments involving laboratory animals.

Authors:  Michael Fw Festing
Journal:  Lab Anim       Date:  2018-01-08       Impact factor: 2.471

6.  The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration.

Authors:  Alessandro Liberati; Douglas G Altman; Jennifer Tetzlaff; Cynthia Mulrow; Peter C Gøtzsche; John P A Ioannidis; Mike Clarke; P J Devereaux; Jos Kleijnen; David Moher
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2009-07-21

7.  Evidence for the efficacy of NXY-059 in experimental focal cerebral ischaemia is confounded by study quality.

Authors:  Malcolm R Macleod; H Bart van der Worp; Emily S Sena; David W Howells; Ulrich Dirnagl; Geoffrey A Donnan
Journal:  Stroke       Date:  2008-07-17       Impact factor: 7.914

Review 8.  NIH initiative to balance sex of animals in preclinical studies: generative questions to guide policy, implementation, and metrics.

Authors:  Louise D McCullough; Geert J de Vries; Virginia M Miller; Jill B Becker; Kathryn Sandberg; Margaret M McCarthy
Journal:  Biol Sex Differ       Date:  2014-10-03       Impact factor: 5.027

9.  Problems and Progress regarding Sex Bias and Omission in Neuroscience Research.

Authors:  Tyler R Will; Stephanie B Proaño; Anly M Thomas; Lindsey M Kunz; Kelly C Thompson; Laura A Ginnari; Clay H Jones; Sarah-Catherine Lucas; Elizabeth M Reavis; David M Dorris; John Meitzen
Journal:  eNeuro       Date:  2017-11-09

10.  What kind of systematic review should I conduct? A proposed typology and guidance for systematic reviewers in the medical and health sciences.

Authors:  Zachary Munn; Cindy Stern; Edoardo Aromataris; Craig Lockwood; Zoe Jordan
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2018-01-10       Impact factor: 4.615

View more
  2 in total

Review 1.  Effect of Panax notoginseng Saponins on Focal Cerebral Ischemia-Reperfusion in Rat Models: A Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Tao Sun; Ping Wang; Ting Deng; Xingbao Tao; Bin Li; Ying Xu
Journal:  Front Pharmacol       Date:  2021-02-09       Impact factor: 5.810

Review 2.  Hydrogels in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis: drug delivery systems and artificial matrices for dynamic in vitro models.

Authors:  Isabel Maria Oliveira; Diogo Castro Fernandes; Ibrahim Fatih Cengiz; Rui Luís Reis; Joaquim Miguel Oliveira
Journal:  J Mater Sci Mater Med       Date:  2021-06-22       Impact factor: 3.896

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.