• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

临床前研究的系统评价和荟萃分析:实验室动物实验中的发表偏倚。

Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of preclinical studies: publication bias in laboratory animal experiments.

机构信息

Department of General Practice, Academic Medical Center (AMC), University of Amsterdam (UvA), PO Box 22700, 1100 DD Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

出版信息

Lab Anim. 2011 Oct;45(4):225-30. doi: 10.1258/la.2011.010121. Epub 2011 Jul 7.

DOI:10.1258/la.2011.010121
PMID:21737463
Abstract

In 2006, Peters et al. identified 86 systematic reviews (SRs) of laboratory animal experiments (LAEs). They found 46 LAE meta-analyses (MAs), often of poor quality. Six of these 46 MAs tried to assess publication bias. Publication bias is the phenomenon of an experiment's results determining its likelihood of publication, often over-representing positive findings. As such, publication bias is the Achilles heel of any SR. Since researchers increasingly become aware of the fact that SRs directly support the 'three Rs', we expect the number of SRs of LAEs will sharply increase. Therefore, it is useful to see how publication bias is dealt with. Our objective was to identify all SRs and MAs of LAEs where the purpose was to inform human health published between July 2005 and 2010 with special attention to MAs' quality features and publication bias. We systematically searched Medline, Embase, Toxline and ScienceDirect from July 2005 to 2010, updating Peters' review. LAEs not directly informing human health or concerning fundamental biology were excluded. We found 2780 references of which 163 met the inclusion criteria: 158 SRs, of which 30 performed an MA, and five MAs without an SR. The number of SRs roughly doubled every three years since 1997. The number of MAs roughly doubled every five years since 1999. Compared with before July 2005, more MAs were preceded by SR and reported on (quality) features of included studies and heterogeneity. A statistically significant proportion of MAs considered publication bias (26/35) and tried to formally assess it (21/35).

摘要

2006 年,Peters 等人鉴定了 86 篇关于实验室动物实验的系统评价(SR)。他们发现了 46 篇动物实验荟萃分析(MA),这些 MA 的质量往往较差。其中 6 篇 MA 尝试评估发表偏倚。发表偏倚是指实验结果决定其发表可能性的现象,通常会过度呈现阳性结果。因此,发表偏倚是任何系统评价的致命弱点。由于研究人员越来越意识到系统评价直接支持“3R”,我们预计关于实验室动物实验的系统评价数量将急剧增加。因此,了解如何处理发表偏倚是很有用的。我们的目的是确定所有旨在告知人类健康的实验室动物实验的系统评价和荟萃分析,这些研究发表于 2005 年 7 月至 2010 年 7 月之间,并特别关注 MA 的质量特征和发表偏倚。我们系统地检索了 Medline、Embase、Toxline 和 ScienceDirect 数据库,检索时间为 2005 年 7 月至 2010 年 7 月,更新了 Peters 的综述。不直接告知人类健康或涉及基础生物学的动物实验被排除在外。我们共检索到 2780 篇参考文献,其中 163 篇符合纳入标准:158 篇系统评价,其中 30 篇进行了荟萃分析,5 篇荟萃分析没有系统评价。自 1997 年以来,系统评价的数量大约每三年翻一番。自 1999 年以来,荟萃分析的数量大约每五年翻一番。与 2005 年 7 月之前相比,更多的荟萃分析有系统评价作为依据,并报告了纳入研究的(质量)特征和异质性。有相当比例的荟萃分析认为存在发表偏倚(26/35),并试图正式评估(21/35)。

相似文献

1
Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of preclinical studies: publication bias in laboratory animal experiments.临床前研究的系统评价和荟萃分析:实验室动物实验中的发表偏倚。
Lab Anim. 2011 Oct;45(4):225-30. doi: 10.1258/la.2011.010121. Epub 2011 Jul 7.
2
Publication bias in medical informatics evaluation research: is it an issue or not?医学信息学评估研究中的发表偏倚:这是一个问题吗?
Stud Health Technol Inform. 2006;124:957-62.
3
Methodologic issues in systematic reviews and meta-analyses.系统评价与荟萃分析中的方法学问题。
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2003 Aug(413):43-54. doi: 10.1097/01.blo.0000079322.41006.5b.
4
Non-Cochrane vs. Cochrane reviews were twice as likely to have positive conclusion statements: cross-sectional study.非Cochrane综述与Cochrane综述相比,得出肯定性结论陈述的可能性要高出一倍:横断面研究。
J Clin Epidemiol. 2009 Apr;62(4):380-386.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2008.08.008. Epub 2009 Jan 6.
5
Assessment for Risk of Bias in Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses in the Field of Hepatology.肝脏病学领域系统评价和Meta分析的偏倚风险评估
Gut Liver. 2015 Nov 23;9(6):701-6. doi: 10.5009/gnl14451.
6
Publication bias in animal research: a systematic review protocol.动物研究中的发表偏倚:系统综述方案。
Syst Rev. 2013 Apr 27;2:23. doi: 10.1186/2046-4053-2-23.
7
[Increased number of systematic reviews in the Netherlands in the period 1991-2000].[1991年至2000年期间荷兰系统评价数量增加]
Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd. 2003 Nov 8;147(45):2226-30.
8
In an empirical evaluation of the funnel plot, researchers could not visually identify publication bias.在对漏斗图的实证评估中,研究人员无法直观地识别出发表偏倚。
J Clin Epidemiol. 2005 Sep;58(9):894-901. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2005.01.006.
9
Sublingual immunotherapy for allergic respiratory diseases: an evaluation of meta-analyses.过敏性呼吸道疾病的舌下免疫疗法:荟萃分析评估
J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2009 Jul;124(1):157-161.e1-32. doi: 10.1016/j.jaci.2009.04.015. Epub 2009 Jun 4.
10
How to read and understand and use systematic reviews and meta-analyses.如何阅读、理解和使用系统评价与Meta分析。
Acta Psychiatr Scand. 2009 Jun;119(6):443-50. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0447.2009.01388.x.

引用本文的文献

1
Impact of krill () meal on growth performance of aquatic animals: A meta-analysis and prospective directions.磷虾粉对水生动物生长性能的影响:一项荟萃分析及前瞻性方向
Anim Nutr. 2025 Feb 12;20:487-498. doi: 10.1016/j.aninu.2024.11.024. eCollection 2025 Mar.
2
Quality, topics, and demographic trends of animal systematic reviews - an umbrella review.动物系统评价的质量、主题和人口统计学趋势——一项综合评价
J Transl Med. 2025 Jan 6;23(1):21. doi: 10.1186/s12967-024-05992-0.
3
Protective effect of salvianolic acid B against myocardial ischemia/reperfusion injury: preclinical systematic evaluation and meta-analysis.
丹酚酸B对心肌缺血/再灌注损伤的保护作用:临床前系统评价与Meta分析
Front Pharmacol. 2024 Sep 11;15:1452545. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2024.1452545. eCollection 2024.
4
The Effects of Physical Activity on Experimental Models of Vascular Dementia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.体育活动对血管性痴呆实验模型的影响:系统评价与荟萃分析
Ann Neurosci. 2024 Jul;31(3):204-224. doi: 10.1177/09727531231192759. Epub 2024 Jan 10.
5
Optogenetic behavioral studies in depression research: A systematic review.抑郁症研究中的光遗传学行为学研究:一项系统综述。
iScience. 2024 Apr 18;27(5):109776. doi: 10.1016/j.isci.2024.109776. eCollection 2024 May 17.
6
Evidence and possible mechanism of and its bioactive compounds for hepatocellular carcinoma treatment.姜黄及其生物活性化合物治疗肝细胞癌的证据和可能机制。
Ann Med. 2023;55(2):2247004. doi: 10.1080/07853890.2023.2247004. Epub 2024 Jan 17.
7
Mesenchymal stem cells therapy for acute kidney injury: A systematic review with meta-analysis based on rat model.间充质干细胞治疗急性肾损伤:基于大鼠模型的系统评价与Meta分析
Front Pharmacol. 2023 Apr 13;14:1099056. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2023.1099056. eCollection 2023.
8
Cardioprotective efficacy of limb remote ischaemic preconditioning in rats: discrepancy between a meta-analysis and a three-centre in vivo study.肢体远程缺血预处理对大鼠的心脏保护作用:荟萃分析与三中心体内研究之间的差异。
Cardiovasc Res. 2023 Jun 13;119(6):1336-1351. doi: 10.1093/cvr/cvad024.
9
Acute liver failure: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of optimal type of stem cells in animal models.急性肝衰竭:动物模型中最佳干细胞类型的系统评价和网状Meta分析
World J Stem Cells. 2023 Jan 26;15(1):1-15. doi: 10.4252/wjsc.v15.i1.1.
10
Black phosphorous-based biomaterials for bone defect regeneration: a systematic review and meta-analysis.基于黑磷的生物材料在骨缺损再生中的应用:系统评价和荟萃分析。
J Nanobiotechnology. 2022 Dec 10;20(1):522. doi: 10.1186/s12951-022-01735-9.