BMJ Open Science最新文献

{"title":"Protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis of data from preclinical studies employing forced swimming test: an update.","authors":"A B Ramos-Hryb, Z Bahor, S McCann, E Sena, M R MacLeod, C Lino de Oliveira","doi":"10.1136/bmjos-2017-000043","DOIUrl":"10.1136/bmjos-2017-000043","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p></p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>Forced swimming test (FST) in rodents is a widely used behavioural test for screening antidepressants in preclinical research. Translational value of preclinical studies may be improved by appraisal of the quality of experimental design and risk of biases, which remains to be addressed for FST. The present protocol of a systematic review with meta-analysis aims to investigate the quality of preclinical studies employing FST to identify risks of bias in future publications. In addition, this protocol will help to determine the effect sizes (ES) for primary and secondary outcomes according to several aspects of the FST study design.</p><p><strong>Search strategy screening annotation data management: </strong>Publications reporting studies testing different classes of antidepressants in FST will be collected from Medline, SCOPUS and Web of Science databases. A broad list of inclusion criteria will be applied excluding those studies whereby FST is used as a stressor or studies reporting data from co-treatments. For assessing the quality of the included publications, the quality checklist adapted by Collaborative Approach to Meta-Analysis and Review of Animal Data from Experimental Studies will be used. If the meta-analysis seems feasible, the ES and the 95% CI will be analysed. The heterogeneity between studies will be assessed by using the χ²statistic with n-1 degrees of freedom. Subgroup meta-analysis (meta-regression, and if necessary, stratified regression) will be performed when possible according to characteristics of study design and study quality to assess their impact on efficacy of the treatments. In addition, funnel plotting, Egger regression, and 'trim and fill' will be used to assess the risk of publication bias. Results of this protocol will help to create rational methodological guidelines for application of FST in rodents and improve the quality and translational value of preclinical research on antidepressant discovery.</p><p><strong>Reporting: </strong>A preliminary version of the present protocol has been preregistered with Systematic Review Facility (http://syrf.org.uk/). A preprint version of the current protocol has been registered with Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/9kxm4/). Results will be communicated in scientific meetings and peer-reviewed journals. We plan to conduct an anonymous and online survey within the scientific community to ask researchers about their perception of risk of bias and their experience with the publication of negative results.</p>","PeriodicalId":9212,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Open Science","volume":"3 1","pages":"e000043"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-05-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8749270/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"39835811","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}

{"title":"Administration of galacto-oligosaccharide prebiotics in the Flinders Sensitive Line animal model of depression.","authors":"Alexandra Bannach-Brown,&nbsp;Sandra Tillmann,&nbsp;Malcolm Robert MacLeod,&nbsp;Gregers Wegener","doi":"10.1136/bmjos-2018-000017","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjos-2018-000017","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Major depressive disorder is the leading source of disability globally and current pharmacological treatments are less than adequate. Animal models such as the Flinders Sensitive Line (FSL) rats are used to mimic aspects of the phenotype in the human disorder and to characterise candidate antidepressant agents. Communication between the gut microbiome and the brain may play an important role in psychiatric disorders such as depression. Interventions targeting the gut microbiota may serve as potential treatments for depression, and this drives increasing research into the effect of probiotics and prebiotics in neuropsychiatric disorders. Prebiotics, galacto-oligosaccharides and fructooligosaccharides that stimulate the activity of gut bacteria have been reported to have a positive impact, reducing anxiety and depressive-like phenotypes and stress-related physiology in mice and rats, as well as in humans. Bimuno, the commercially available beta-galacto-oligosaccharide, has been shown to increase gut microbiota diversity.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>Here, we aim to investigate the effect of Bimuno on rat anxiety-like and depressive-like behaviour and gut microbiota composition in the FSL model, a genetic model of depression, in comparison to their control, the Flinders Resistant Line (FRL) rats.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Sixty-four male rats aged 5-7 weeks, 32 FSL and 32 FRL rats, will be randomised to receive Bimuno or control (4 g/kg) daily for 4 weeks. Animals will be tested by an experimenter unaware of group allocation on the forced swim test to assessed depressive-like behaviour, the elevated plus maze to assess anxiety-like behaviour and the open field test to assess locomotion. Animals will be weighed and food and water intake, per kilogram of bodyweight, will be recorded. Faeces will be collected from each animal prior to the start of the experiment and on the final day to assess the bacterial diversity and relative abundance of bacterial genera in the gut. All outcomes and statistical analysis will be carried out blinded to group allocation, group assignments will be revealed after raw data have been uploaded to Open Science Framework. Two-way analysis of variance will be carried out to investigate the effect of treatment (control or prebiotic) and strain (FSL or FRL) on depressive-like and anxiety-like behaviours.</p>","PeriodicalId":9212,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Open Science","volume":"3 1","pages":"e000017"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-05-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1136/bmjos-2018-000017","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"39834324","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}

{"title":"Did a change in Nature journals' editorial policy for life sciences research improve reporting?","authors":"","doi":"10.1136/bmjos-2017-000035","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjos-2017-000035","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p></p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To determine whether a change in editorial policy, including the implementation of a checklist, has been associated with improved reporting of measures which might reduce the risk of bias.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The study protocol has been published at doi: 10.1007/s11192-016-1964-8.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Observational cohort study.</p><p><strong>Population: </strong>Articles describing research in the life sciences published in Nature journals, submitted after 1 May 2013.</p><p><strong>Intervention: </strong>Mandatory completion of a checklist during manuscript revision.</p><p><strong>Comparators: </strong>(1) Articles describing research in the life sciences published in Nature journals, submitted before May 2013; and (2) similar articles in other journals matched for date and topic.</p><p><strong>Primary outcome: </strong>The primary outcome is change in the proportion of Nature articles describing in vivo research published before and after May 2013 reporting the 'Landis 4' items (randomisation, blinding, sample size calculation and exclusions). We included 448 Nature Publishing Group (NPG) articles (223 published before May 2013, and 225 after) identified by an individual hired by NPG for this specific task, working to a standard procedure; and an independent investigator used PubMed 'Related Citations' to identify 448 non-NPG articles with a similar topic and date of publication from other journals; and then redacted all articles for time-sensitive information and journal name. Redacted articles were assessed by two trained reviewers against a 74-item checklist, with discrepancies resolved by a third.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>394 NPG and 353 matching non-NPG articles described in vivo research. The number of NPG articles meeting all relevant Landis 4 criteria increased from 0/203 prior to May 2013 to 31/181 (16.4%) after (two-sample test for equality of proportions without continuity correction, Χ²=36.2, df=1, p=1.8×10^-9). There was no change in the proportion of non-NPG articles meeting all relevant Landis 4 criteria (1/164 before, 1/189 after). There were more substantial improvements in the individual prevalences of reporting of randomisation, blinding, exclusions and sample size calculations for in vivo experiments, and less substantial improvements for in vitro experiments.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>There was an improvement in the reporting of risks of bias in in vivo research in NPG journals following a change in editorial policy, to a level that to our knowledge has not been previously observed. However, there remain opportunities for further improvement.</p>","PeriodicalId":9212,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Open Science","volume":"3 1","pages":"e000035"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-02-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8647608/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"39835810","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}

{"title":"Lower retention after retrograde coronary venous infusion compared with intracoronary infusion of mesenchymal stromal cells in the infarcted porcine myocardium.","authors":"Wouter A Gathier, Mira van der Naald, Bas R van Klarenbosch, Anton E Tuinenburg, John Lm Bemelmans, Klaus Neef, Joost Pg Sluijter, Frebus J van Slochteren, Pieter A Doevendans, Steven Aj Chamuleau","doi":"10.1136/bmjos-2018-000006","DOIUrl":"10.1136/bmjos-2018-000006","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p></p><p><strong>Background: </strong>Commonly used strategies for cell delivery to the heart are intramyocardial injection and intracoronary (IC) infusion, both having their advantages and disadvantages. Therefore, alternative strategies, such as retrograde coronary venous infusion (RCVI), are explored. The aim of this confirmatory study was to compare cardiac cell retention between RCVI and IC infusion. As a secondary end point, the procedural safety of RCVI is assessed.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Four weeks after myocardial infarction, 12 pigs were randomised to receive mesenchymal stromal cells, labelled with Indium-111, via RCVI (n=6) or IC infusion (n=6). Four hours after cell administration, nuclear imaging was performed to determine the number of cells retained in the heart both in vivo and ex vivo. Procedure-related safety measures were reported.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Cardiac cell retention is significantly lower after RCVI compared with IC infusion (in vivo: RCVI: median 2.89% vs IC: median 13.74%, p=0.002, ex vivo: RCVI: median 2.55% vs IC: median 39.40%, p=0.002). RCVI led to development of pericardial fluid and haematomas on the frontal wall of the heart in three cases. Coronary venous dissection after RCVI was seen in three pigs, of which one also developed pericardial fluid and a haematoma. IC infusion led to no flow in one pig.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>RCVI is significantly less efficient in delivering cells to the heart compared with IC infusion. RCVI led to more procedure-related safety issues than IC infusion, with multiple cases of venous dissection and development of haematomas and pericardial fluid collections.</p>","PeriodicalId":9212,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Open Science","volume":"3 1","pages":"e000006"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-01-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8647578/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"39833892","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}

{"title":"Effects of experimental sleep deprivation on aggressive, sexual and maternal behaviour in animals: a systematic review protocol.","authors":"Gabriel Natan Pires,&nbsp;Andréia Gomes Bezerra,&nbsp;Rob B M de Vries,&nbsp;Cathalijn H C Leenaars,&nbsp;Merel Ritskes-Hoitinga,&nbsp;Sergio Tufik,&nbsp;Monica Levy Andersen","doi":"10.1136/bmjos-2017-000041","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjos-2017-000041","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Because of the relevance for the research on sleep deprivation and human behaviour, many preclinical studies have been conducted on aggressive, sexual and maternal behaviours in this field. Considering the available data and the complexity of the factors involved, the most appropriate way to summarise the effects of sleep deprivation on these behaviours is through systematic reviews and meta-analyses. This article describes the protocol for three independent systematic reviews and meta-analyses, evaluating the effects of sleep deprivation on aggressive, sexual and maternal behaviours in animals.</p><p><strong>Search strategy: </strong>A bibliographic search will be performed in four databases: Pubmed, Scopus, Web of Science and Psychinfo, searching for three domains: sleep deprivation (as the intervention), animals (as the population) and behaviour (as the outcome).</p><p><strong>Screening and annotation: </strong>Titles and abstracts will first be screened, followed by analysis of the full text and data extraction.</p><p><strong>Data management and reporting: </strong>SYstematic Review Centre for Laboratory Animal Experimentation 's risk of bias tool will be used to evaluate risk of bias; visual analysis of funnel plots, Egger's regression and trim-and-fill will be employed to evaluate publication bias. Effect sizes will be calculated from the articles by either direct or standardised mean difference, depending on the nature of the data. Overall estimates will then be calculated using a random effects model. Heterogeneity will be assessed using both I² index and Cochran's Q test. These meta-analyses should be useful to summarise the available data on the relationship between sleep deprivation and behaviour, providing a solid background for future behavioural sleep deprivation experiments, improving their validity.</p>","PeriodicalId":9212,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Open Science","volume":"2 1","pages":"e000041"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-11-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8749292/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"39833890","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}

{"title":"Behavioural effects of methylphenidate in the spontaneously hypertensive rat model of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol.","authors":"Douglas Teixeira Leffa, Alana Castro Panzenhagen, Diego Luiz Rovaris, Claiton Henrique Dotto Bau, Luis Augusto Rohde, Eugenio Horacio Grevet, Gabriel Natan Pires","doi":"10.1136/bmjos-2018-000001","DOIUrl":"10.1136/bmjos-2018-000001","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a prevalent condition related to several negative outcomes, and its pathophysiology is still poorly understood. The spontaneously hypertensive rats (SHRs) are the most commonly used animal model of ADHD. How ever, its validity, and especially its predictive validity, has been questioned. Therefore, the current protocol discloses the background, aims and methods of a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting the behavioural effects of methylphenidate (MPH), the most commonly prescribed treatment for ADHD, in the SHR.</p><p><strong>Search strategy: </strong>Studies will be identified through a literature search using three different electronic databases: Medline, Embase and Web of Science. There will be no language restrictions. All s tudies that administered MPH to SHR and evaluated locomotion, attention, impulsivity or memory will be included.</p><p><strong>Screening and annotation: </strong>Studies will be prescreened based on title and abstract, and a full-text review will be performed if necessary. Screening will be performed by two authors, and any disagreement will be discussed with a third author.</p><p><strong>Data management and reporting: </strong>Data extraction will be performed by two independent authors according to a standardised form. Studies will be grouped according to the behavioural outcomes reported, and a meta-analysis will be performed for each group. The influence of predefined covariates on the effects of MPH will be evaluated using meta-regression and sensitivity analyses. Data will be reported following PRISMA guidelines.</p>","PeriodicalId":9212,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Open Science","volume":"2 1","pages":"e000001"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-10-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8715948/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"39833888","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}

{"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":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjos-2018-000004","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":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-09-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1136/bmjos-2018-000004","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"39833889","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}

{"title":"Revision of the ARRIVE guidelines: rationale and scope.","authors":"Nathalie Percie du Sert, Viki Hurst, Amrita Ahluwalia, Sabina Alam, Douglas G Altman, Marc T Avey, Monya Baker, William Browne, Alejandra Clark, Innes C Cuthill, Ulrich Dirnagl, Michael Emerson, Paul Garner, David W Howells, Natasha A Karp, Catriona J MacCallum, Malcolm Macleod, Ole Petersen, Frances Rawle, Penny Reynolds, Kieron Rooney, Emily S Sena, Shai D Silberberg, Thomas Steckler, Hanno Würbel, Stephen T Holgate","doi":"10.1136/bmjos-2018-000002","DOIUrl":"10.1136/bmjos-2018-000002","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In 2010, the NC3Rs published the Animal Research: Reporting of In Vivo Experiments (ARRIVE) guidelines to improve the reporting of animal research. Despite considerable levels of support from the scientific community, the impact on the quality of reporting in animal research publications has been limited. This position paper highlights the strategy of an expert working group established to revise the guidelines and facilitate their uptake. The group's initial work will focus on three main areas: prioritisation of the ARRIVE items into a tiered system, development of an explanation and elaboration document, and revision of specific items.</p>","PeriodicalId":9212,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Open Science","volume":"2 1","pages":"e000002"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-06-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7610716/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"38964036","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}

{"title":"Inaugural editorial: advancing preclinical and translational research of relevance to medicine.","authors":"Emily S Sena","doi":"10.1136/bmjos-2017-ined","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjos-2017-ined","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":9212,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Open Science","volume":"1 1","pages":"eined"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2017-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1136/bmjos-2017-ined","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"39833887","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}