Quality and Trends of Animal Systematic Reviews
Author Information
Author(s): Hild Bernard Friedrich, Brüschweiler David, Hild Sophia Theodora Katharina, Bugajska Julia, von Wyl Viktor, Rosso Marianna, Wever Kimberley Elaine, Furrer Eva
Primary Institution: University of Zurich
Hypothesis
This study aimed to assess the quality and demographic trends of animal systematic reviews in neuroscience, including changes over time.
Conclusion
Animal systematic reviews in neuroscience are of overall high quality, but there are specific areas for enhancement such as the recommended pre-publication of study protocols.
Supporting Evidence
- Animal systematic reviews are increasingly employed, covering a broad range of topics.
- The most prolific countries in publishing systematic reviews are the USA, China, the UK, Brazil, and Iran.
- The quality of systematic reviews is generally high and has improved over time.
- Many common psychiatric diseases are underrepresented in systematic reviews.
- Systematic reviews with a reported study protocol had higher quality scores compared to those without.
Takeaway
The study looked at many animal research reviews and found that while they are generally good, some topics need more attention and researchers should share their plans before starting.
Methodology
An umbrella review of animal systematic reviews was performed, searching Medline and Embase for reviews until January 27, 2023, using a validated data mining method for quality evaluation.
Potential Biases
Potential bias due to reliance on reported information and the lack of thorough examination of full texts for eligibility.
Limitations
The broad definition of systematic reviews may include some studies that do not strictly adhere to established definitions, and quality was assessed based on reported information which may not reflect actual execution quality.
Participant Demographics
The reviews originated from 64 countries, with notable contributions from the USA, China, UK, Brazil, and Iran.
Statistical Information
P-Value
p<0.001
Statistical Significance
p<0.001
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
Want to read the original?
Access the complete publication on the publisher's website