Evidence-based preclinical medicine最新文献

Improving our understanding of the in vivo modelling of psychotic disorders: A protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis. 提高我们对精神疾病体内模型的理解:一项系统回顾和荟萃分析的方案。

Evidence-based preclinical medicine Pub Date : 2016-12-01 Epub Date: 2017-03-17 DOI: 10.1002/ebm2.22

Zsanett Bahor, Cristina Nunes-Fonseca, Lindsay D G Thomson, Emily S Sena, Malcolm R Macleod

{"title":"Improving our understanding of the <i>in vivo</i> modelling of psychotic disorders: A protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Zsanett Bahor, Cristina Nunes-Fonseca, Lindsay D G Thomson, Emily S Sena, Malcolm R Macleod","doi":"10.1002/ebm2.22","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/ebm2.22","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Psychosis represents a set of symptoms against which current available treatments are not universally effective and are often accompanied by adverse side effects. Clinical management could potentially be improved with a greater understanding of the underlying biology and subsequently with the introduction of novel treatments. Since many clinical drug candidates are identified through <i>in vivo</i> modelling, a deeper understanding of the pre-clinical field, might help us understand why translation of results from animal models to inform mental health clinical practice has so far been weak. We set out to give a shallow, but broad unbiased overview of experiments looking at the <i>in vivo</i> modelling of psychotic disorders using a systematic review and meta-analysis. This protocol describes the exact methodology we propose to follow in order to quantitatively review both studies characterizing a model and those experiments that investigate the effects of novel therapeutic options. We are interested in assessing the prevalence of the reporting of measures to reduce risk of bias, and the internal and external validity of the animal models and outcome measures used to validate these models. This generation of strong empirical evidence has the potential to identify areas for improvement, make suggestions for future research avenues, and ultimately inform what we think we know to improve the current attrition rate between bench and bedside in psychosis research. A review like this will also support the reduction of animal numbers used in research and the refinement of experiments to maximize their value in informing the field.</p>","PeriodicalId":90826,"journal":{"name":"Evidence-based preclinical medicine","volume":"3 2","pages":"e00022"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/ebm2.22","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"34909854","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 2

Study protocol – A systematic review and meta‐analysis of hypothermia in experimental traumatic brain injury: Why have promising animal studies not been replicated in pragmatic clinical trials? 研究方案-实验性外伤性脑损伤中低温的系统回顾和荟萃分析:为什么有希望的动物研究没有在实用的临床试验中得到复制?

Evidence-based preclinical medicine Pub Date : 2016-10-18 DOI: 10.1002/ebm2.20

T. Hirst, Ralf Watzlawick, J. Rhodes, M. Macleod, P. Andrews

引用次数: 10

Protocol for a systematic review of effect sizes and statistical power in the rodent fear conditioning literature 对啮齿动物恐惧调节文献的效应大小和统计能力进行系统评价的方案

Evidence-based preclinical medicine Pub Date : 2016-07-31 DOI: 10.1002/ebm2.16

T.C. Moulin, C.F.D. Carneiro, M.R. Macleod, O.B. Amaral

{"title":"Protocol for a systematic review of effect sizes and statistical power in the rodent fear conditioning literature","authors":"T.C. Moulin, C.F.D. Carneiro, M.R. Macleod, O.B. Amaral","doi":"10.1002/ebm2.16","DOIUrl":"10.1002/ebm2.16","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 <p>The concepts of effect size and statistical power are often disregarded in basic neuroscience, and most articles in the field draw their conclusions solely based on the arbitrary significance thresholds of statistical inference tests. Moreover, studies are often underpowered, making conclusions from significance tests less reliable. With this in mind, we present the protocol of a systematic review to study the distribution of effect sizes and statistical power in the rodent fear conditioning literature, and to analyse how these factors influence the description and publication of results. To do this, we will conduct a search in PubMed for “fear conditioning” AND “mouse” OR “mice” OR “rat” OR “rats” and obtain all articles published online in 2013. Experiments will be included if they: (1) describe the effect(s) of a single intervention on fear conditioning acquisition or consolidation; (2) have a control group to which the experimental group is compared; (3) use freezing as a measure of conditioned fear and (4) have available data on mean freezing, standard deviation and sample size of each group and on the statistical significance of the comparison. We will use the extracted data to calculate the distribution of effect sizes in these experiments as well as the distribution of statistical power curves for detecting a range of differences at a threshold of α = 0.05. We will assess correlations between these variables and (1) the chances of a result being statistically significant, (2) the way the result is described in the article text, (3) measures to reduce risk of bias in the article and (4) the impact factor of the journal and the number of citations of the article. We will also perform analyses to see whether effect sizes vary systematically across species, gender, conditioning protocols or intervention types.</p>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":90826,"journal":{"name":"Evidence-based preclinical medicine","volume":"3 1","pages":"24-32"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/ebm2.16","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"35875752","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 2

From a mouse: systematic analysis reveals limitations of experiments testing interventions in Alzheimer's disease mouse models 来自小鼠:系统分析揭示了阿尔茨海默病小鼠模型中实验测试干预措施的局限性

Evidence-based preclinical medicine Pub Date : 2016-07-22 DOI: 10.1002/ebm2.15

K.J. Egan, H.M. Vesterinen, V. Beglopoulos, E.S. Sena, M.R. Macleod

{"title":"From a mouse: systematic analysis reveals limitations of experiments testing interventions in Alzheimer's disease mouse models","authors":"K.J. Egan, H.M. Vesterinen, V. Beglopoulos, E.S. Sena, M.R. Macleod","doi":"10.1002/ebm2.15","DOIUrl":"10.1002/ebm2.15","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 <p>The increasing prevalence of Alzheimer's disease (AD) poses a considerable socio-economic challenge. Decades of experimental research have not led to the development of effective disease modifying interventions. A deeper understanding of <i>in vivo</i> research might provide insights to inform future <i>in vivo</i> research and clinical trial design. We therefore performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of interventions tested in transgenic mouse models of AD. We searched electronically for publications testing interventions in transgenic models of AD. We extracted data for outcome, study characteristics and reported study quality and calculated summary estimates of efficacy using random effects meta-analysis. We identified 427 publications describing 357 interventions in 55 transgenic models, involving 11,118 animals in 838 experiments. Of concern, reported study quality was relatively low; fewer than one in four publications reported the blinded assessment of outcome or random allocation to group and no study reported a sample size calculation. Additionally, there were few data for any individual intervention—only 16 interventions had outcomes described in 5 or more publications. Finally, “trim and fill” analyses suggested one in seven pathological and neurobehavioural experiments remain unpublished. Given these historical weaknesses in the <i>in vivo</i> modelling of AD in transgenic animals and the identified risks of bias, clinical trials that are based on claims of efficacy in animals should only proceed after a detailed critical appraisal of those animal data.</p>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":90826,"journal":{"name":"Evidence-based preclinical medicine","volume":"3 1","pages":"12-23"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-07-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/ebm2.15","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"35319188","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 33

Protocol for meta-analysis of temperature reduction in animal models of cardiac arrest 心脏骤停动物模型体温降低的meta分析方案

Evidence-based preclinical medicine Pub Date : 2016-05-03 DOI: 10.1002/ebm2.14

H. Olai, G. Thornéus, H. Watson, M.R. Macleod, H. Friberg, J. Rhodes, N. Nielsen, T. Cronberg, T. Deierborg

引用次数: 1

Efficacy of alpha-calcitonin gene-related peptide in dilating cerebral arteries: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis of in vivo animal studies α -降钙素基因相关肽在扩张脑动脉中的功效:体内动物研究的系统回顾和荟萃分析方案

Evidence-based preclinical medicine Pub Date : 2016-01-15 DOI: 10.1002/ebm2.13

L.M.C. Flynn, M.R. Macleod, C.J. Begg, P.J. Andrews

引用次数: 1

The development of an online database for interventions tested in transgenic mouse models of Alzheimer's disease 在阿尔茨海默病转基因小鼠模型中测试干预措施的在线数据库的开发

Evidence-based preclinical medicine Pub Date : 2015-08-11 DOI: 10.1002/ebm2.10

K. J. Egan, H. M. Vesterinen, S. K. McCann, E. S. Sena, M. R. MacLeod

引用次数: 5

Prof Benchie and Dr Athena—A modern tragedy… 本奇教授和雅典娜博士是现代悲剧……

Evidence-based preclinical medicine Pub Date : 2015-06-27 DOI: 10.1002/ebm2.8

Malcolm Macleod

{"title":"Prof Benchie and Dr Athena—A modern tragedy…","authors":"Malcolm Macleod","doi":"10.1002/ebm2.8","DOIUrl":"10.1002/ebm2.8","url":null,"abstract":"<p>…..in which Professor Benchie, an established super-sub-speciality clinician who spends most of his time performing laboratory research, profers advice to Athena, an enthusiastic early career physician who, although she spent summers in the lab as a medical student, is just finishing a research fellowship that included a course in clinical research and wonders whether she would prefer to devote her research time to patient-based therapeutic trials.</p><p>“<i>Prof, now I'm really worried. I'm not sure, from what you've said, that I can rely on conclusions that come out of the lab. Far from being clean, and precise, you seem to be ignoring problems with validity which, because they also bedevil clinical studies, we've worked to prevent and overcome. Let me go and read up about this ….”</i></p><p>With this Dr Athena goes off to the biomedical library and does some literature research, helpfully guided by their staff and an expanding number of relevant publications on this issue ….</p><p>Later that same month ….</p><p>“Cripes, Athena. Your systematic demolition of our cherished bench research methods has shaken my confidence in my own work, and I need to go away and read and think and reformulate my research strategies and tactics. I guess you won't be coming near the lab then”</p>","PeriodicalId":90826,"journal":{"name":"Evidence-based preclinical medicine","volume":"2 1","pages":"16-19"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2015-06-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/ebm2.8","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"51603071","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 1

Cardiac stem cell treatment in myocardial infarction: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis of preclinical studies 心肌梗死的心脏干细胞治疗：临床前研究的系统综述和荟萃分析方案

Evidence-based preclinical medicine Pub Date : 2015-06-16 DOI: 10.1002/ebm2.9

P. P. Zwetsloot, S. J. Jansen of Lorkeers, A. M. D. Végh, G. P. J. van Hout, G. L. Currie, M. J. Goumans, S. A. J. Chamuleau, J. P. G. Sluijter

{"title":"Cardiac stem cell treatment in myocardial infarction: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis of preclinical studies","authors":"P. P. Zwetsloot, S. J. Jansen of Lorkeers, A. M. D. Végh, G. P. J. van Hout, G. L. Currie, M. J. Goumans, S. A. J. Chamuleau, J. P. G. Sluijter","doi":"10.1002/ebm2.9","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/ebm2.9","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Cardiac-derived stem or progenitor cells (CSCs) have emerged as a possible therapeutic intervention for myocardial infarction, potentially ameliorating the devastating effects caused by inadequate blood flow to the heart. The first human clinical trials using these myocardial-derived cells have recently started, but scientific controversy exists regarding the efficacy and origin of some of these stem cells in preclinical animal models. Systematic review of the current literature on CSCs in ischaemic cardiomyopathy can provide useful additional information on the use of CSCs in preclinical trials. By combining all available data, we can adequately compare the different types of cells being used and possibly identify factors that influence cardiac stem cell therapy in general. This protocol provides a thorough description of the methodology that will be used in our systematic review and meta-analysis of all preclinical animal studies involving cardiac stem cell treatment for ischaemic cardiomyopathy.</p>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":90826,"journal":{"name":"Evidence-based preclinical medicine","volume":"2 1","pages":"10-15"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2015-06-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/ebm2.9","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"71961652","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 8

A protocol format for the preparation, registration and publication of systematic reviews of animal intervention studies 动物干预研究系统综述的编制、注册和出版的协议格式

Evidence-based preclinical medicine Pub Date : 2015-02-24 DOI: 10.1002/ebm2.7

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":"https://doi.org/10.1002/ebm2.7","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 <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>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":90826,"journal":{"name":"Evidence-based preclinical medicine","volume":"2 1","pages":"1-9"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2015-02-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/ebm2.7","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"71983060","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 201