Protocol for a systematic review of guidelines for rigour in the design, conduct and analysis of biomedical experiments involving laboratory animals.

Q1 Medicine BMJ Open Science Pub Date : 2018-09-07 eCollection Date: 2018-01-01 DOI:10.1136/bmjos-2018-000004
Jan Vollert, Esther Schenker, Malcolm Macleod, Anton Bespalov, Hanno Wuerbel, Martin Christian Michel, Ulrich Dirnagl, Heidrun Potschka, Kimberley E Wever, Thomas Steckler, Bruce Altevogt, Andrew S C Rice
{"title":"Protocol for a systematic review of guidelines for rigour in the design, conduct and analysis of biomedical experiments involving laboratory animals.","authors":"Jan Vollert,&nbsp;Esther Schenker,&nbsp;Malcolm Macleod,&nbsp;Anton Bespalov,&nbsp;Hanno Wuerbel,&nbsp;Martin Christian Michel,&nbsp;Ulrich Dirnagl,&nbsp;Heidrun Potschka,&nbsp;Kimberley E Wever,&nbsp;Thomas Steckler,&nbsp;Bruce Altevogt,&nbsp;Andrew S C Rice","doi":"10.1136/bmjos-2018-000004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Within the last years, there has been growing awareness of the negative repercussions of unstandardized planning, conduct and reporting of preclinical and biomedical research. Several initiatives have set the aim of increasing validity and reliability in reporting of studies and publications, and publishers have formed similar groups. Additionally, several groups of experts across the biomedical spectrum have published experience and opinion-based guidelines and guidance on potential standardized reporting. While all these guidelines cover reporting of experiments, an important step prior to this should be rigours planning and conduction of studies. The aim of this systematic review is to identify and harmonize existing experimental design, conduct and analysis guidelines relating to internal validity and reproducibility of preclinical animal research. The review will also identify literature describing risks of bias pertaining to the design, conduct and analysis of preclinical biomedical research.</p><p><strong>Search strategy: </strong>PubMed, Embase and Web of Science will be searched systematically to identify guidelines published in English language in peer-reviewed journals before January 2018 (box 1). All articles or systematic reviews in English language that describe or review guidelines on the internal validity and reproducibility of animal studies will be included. Google search for guidelines published on the websites of major funders and professional organisations can be found in (Box 2).</p><p><strong>Screening and annotation: </strong>Unique references will be screened in two phases: screening for eligibility based on title and abstract, followed by screening for definitive inclusion based on full text. Screening will be performed in SyRF (http://syrf.org.uk). Each reference will be randomly presented to two independent reviewers. Disagreements between reviewers will be resolved by additional screening of the reference by a third, senior researcher.</p><p><strong>Data management and reporting: </strong>All data, including extracted text and guidelines, will be stored in the SyRF platform. Elements of the included guidelines will be identified using a standardized extraction form. Reporting will follow the PRISMA guidelines as far as applicable.</p>","PeriodicalId":9212,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Open Science","volume":"2 1","pages":"e000004"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-09-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1136/bmjos-2018-000004","citationCount":"7","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Open Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjos-2018-000004","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2018/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

Abstract

Objective: Within the last years, there has been growing awareness of the negative repercussions of unstandardized planning, conduct and reporting of preclinical and biomedical research. Several initiatives have set the aim of increasing validity and reliability in reporting of studies and publications, and publishers have formed similar groups. Additionally, several groups of experts across the biomedical spectrum have published experience and opinion-based guidelines and guidance on potential standardized reporting. While all these guidelines cover reporting of experiments, an important step prior to this should be rigours planning and conduction of studies. The aim of this systematic review is to identify and harmonize existing experimental design, conduct and analysis guidelines relating to internal validity and reproducibility of preclinical animal research. The review will also identify literature describing risks of bias pertaining to the design, conduct and analysis of preclinical biomedical research.

Search strategy: PubMed, Embase and Web of Science will be searched systematically to identify guidelines published in English language in peer-reviewed journals before January 2018 (box 1). All articles or systematic reviews in English language that describe or review guidelines on the internal validity and reproducibility of animal studies will be included. Google search for guidelines published on the websites of major funders and professional organisations can be found in (Box 2).

Screening and annotation: Unique references will be screened in two phases: screening for eligibility based on title and abstract, followed by screening for definitive inclusion based on full text. Screening will be performed in SyRF (http://syrf.org.uk). Each reference will be randomly presented to two independent reviewers. Disagreements between reviewers will be resolved by additional screening of the reference by a third, senior researcher.

Data management and reporting: All data, including extracted text and guidelines, will be stored in the SyRF platform. Elements of the included guidelines will be identified using a standardized extraction form. Reporting will follow the PRISMA guidelines as far as applicable.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
对涉及实验动物的生物医学实验的设计、实施和分析的严格性准则进行系统审查的方案。
目的:在过去几年中,人们越来越意识到临床前和生物医学研究的不规范规划、实施和报告的负面影响。一些倡议已经确立了提高研究和出版物报告的有效性和可靠性的目标,出版商也成立了类似的团体。此外,生物医学领域的几个专家小组已经发布了基于经验和意见的指南以及关于潜在标准化报告的指南。虽然所有这些准则都涵盖了实验报告,但在此之前的一个重要步骤应该是严格的研究计划和实施。本系统综述的目的是确定和协调与临床前动物研究的内部有效性和可重复性有关的现有实验设计、实施和分析指南。本综述还将识别描述与临床前生物医学研究的设计、实施和分析有关的偏倚风险的文献。检索策略:系统检索PubMed、Embase和Web of Science,以确定2018年1月之前在同行评议期刊上发表的英文指南(方框1)。所有描述或评论动物研究内部有效性和可重复性指南的英文文章或系统综述将被纳入。在Google上搜索主要资助者和专业机构网站上发布的指南可在(方框2)中找到。筛选和注释:独特的参考文献将分两个阶段进行筛选:根据标题和摘要筛选资格,然后根据全文筛选最终纳入。筛选将在SyRF (http://syrf.org.uk)中进行。每个参考文献将随机提交给两个独立的审稿人。审稿人之间的分歧将通过第三位资深研究员对参考文献的额外筛选来解决。数据管理和报告:所有数据,包括提取的文本和指南,将存储在SyRF平台中。将使用标准化的提取表格确定所包含的指导方针的要素。报告将尽可能遵循PRISMA的指导方针。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
BMJ Open Science
BMJ Open Science Medicine-General Medicine
CiteScore
10.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
9
审稿时长
31 weeks
期刊最新文献
Correction: Preclinical safety study of nacre powder in an intraosseous sheep model. Protocol for a systematic review of the validity of animal models of polydipsia with a basis in schizophrenia aetiology. Preclinical safety study of nacre powder in an intraosseous sheep model. Protocol for a systematic review of good surgical practice guidelines for experimental rodent surgery. Genome-wide DNA methylation in an animal model and human studies of schizophrenia: a protocol for a meta-analysis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1