Rob B. M. de Vries, Carlijn R. Hooijmans, Miranda W. Langendam, Judith van Luijk, Marlies Leenaars, Merel Ritskes-Hoitinga, Kimberley E. Wever
{"title":"A protocol format for the preparation, registration and publication of systematic reviews of animal intervention studies","authors":"Rob B. M. de Vries, Carlijn R. Hooijmans, Miranda W. Langendam, Judith van Luijk, Marlies Leenaars, Merel Ritskes-Hoitinga, Kimberley E. Wever","doi":"10.1002/ebm2.7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p>Systematic reviews are an important method to support evidence-based decisions in healthcare (research). Although not yet as common as clinical systematic reviews, the number of systematic reviews of animal studies has been increasing steadily in recent years. An important method to promote high-quality systematic reviews is to pre-specify the review methodology in a protocol, before the conduct of the systematic review itself. In contrast to clinical systematic reviews, a standard protocol format for systematic reviews of animal studies is not yet available. Here, we present a protocol format tailored to the preparation, registration and publication of systematic reviews of animal intervention studies (i.e. systematic reviews of animal experiments studying the efficacy and/or safety of interventions intended for use in human patients). In analogy to the Cochrane review protocol, the format helps authors predefine the methodological approach of their systematic review, from research question to data synthesis. We recommend that authors prospectively complete and agree on the protocol, and register and/or publish it to allow feedback on the proposed methodology and to avoid the introduction of bias during the review process. Opportunities for obtaining feedback, and for registration and publication of review protocols are also discussed.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":90826,"journal":{"name":"Evidence-based preclinical medicine","volume":"2 1","pages":"1-9"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-02-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/ebm2.7","citationCount":"201","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Evidence-based preclinical medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ebm2.7","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 201
Abstract
Systematic reviews are an important method to support evidence-based decisions in healthcare (research). Although not yet as common as clinical systematic reviews, the number of systematic reviews of animal studies has been increasing steadily in recent years. An important method to promote high-quality systematic reviews is to pre-specify the review methodology in a protocol, before the conduct of the systematic review itself. In contrast to clinical systematic reviews, a standard protocol format for systematic reviews of animal studies is not yet available. Here, we present a protocol format tailored to the preparation, registration and publication of systematic reviews of animal intervention studies (i.e. systematic reviews of animal experiments studying the efficacy and/or safety of interventions intended for use in human patients). In analogy to the Cochrane review protocol, the format helps authors predefine the methodological approach of their systematic review, from research question to data synthesis. We recommend that authors prospectively complete and agree on the protocol, and register and/or publish it to allow feedback on the proposed methodology and to avoid the introduction of bias during the review process. Opportunities for obtaining feedback, and for registration and publication of review protocols are also discussed.