van Luijk Judith, Bakker Brenda, Rovers Maroeska M, Ritskes-Hoitinga Merel, de Vries Rob B M, Leenaars Marlies
SYRCLE - Central Animal Laboratory, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Departments for Health Evidence and Operating rooms, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
PLoS One. 2014 Mar 26;9(3):e89981. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0089981. eCollection 2014.
The methodological quality of animal studies is an important factor hampering the translation of results from animal studies to a clinical setting. Systematic reviews of animal studies may provide a suitable method to assess and thereby improve their methodological quality.
The aims of this study were: 1) to evaluate the risk of bias assessment in animal-based systematic reviews, and 2) to study the internal validity of the primary animal studies included in these systematic reviews.
We systematically searched Pubmed and Embase for SRs of preclinical animal studies published between 2005 and 2012.
A total of 91 systematic reviews met our inclusion criteria. The risk of bias was assessed in 48 (52.7%) of these 91 systematic reviews. Thirty-three (36.3%) SRs provided sufficient information to evaluate the internal validity of the included studies. Of the evaluated primary studies, 24.6% was randomized, 14.6% reported blinding of the investigator/caretaker, 23.9% blinded the outcome assessment, and 23.1% reported drop-outs.
To improve the translation of animal data to clinical practice, systematic reviews of animal studies are worthwhile, but the internal validity of primary animal studies needs to be improved. Furthermore, risk of bias should be assessed by systematic reviews of animal studies to provide insight into the reliability of the available evidence.
动物研究的方法学质量是阻碍动物研究结果转化至临床应用的重要因素。对动物研究进行系统评价可能是评估并进而提高其方法学质量的合适方法。
本研究的目的为：1）评估基于动物的系统评价中的偏倚风险评估情况；2）研究这些系统评价中纳入的原始动物研究的内部效度。
我们系统检索了PubMed和Embase，以查找2005年至2012年发表的临床前动物研究的系统评价。
共有91项系统评价符合我们的纳入标准。在这91项系统评价中，48项（52.7%）评估了偏倚风险。33项（36.3%）系统评价提供了足够信息以评估纳入研究的内部效度。在所评估的原始研究中，24.6%为随机研究，14.6%报告了研究者/照料者实施了盲法，23.9%对结果评估实施了盲法，23.1%报告了失访情况。
为提高动物数据向临床实践的转化，对动物研究进行系统评价是有价值的，但原始动物研究的内部效度有待提高。此外，应通过对动物研究的系统评价来评估偏倚风险，以便深入了解现有证据的可靠性。
