Format

Send to

Choose Destination
J Environ Sci Health B. 2006;41(7):1245-58.

A systematic review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of animal experiments with guidelines for reporting.

Author information

1
Centre for Biostatistics and Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Health Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK. jlp9@leicester.ac.uk

Abstract

To maximize the findings of animal experiments to inform likely health effects in humans, a thorough review and evaluation of the animal evidence is required. Systematic reviews and, where appropriate, meta-analyses have great potential in facilitating such an evaluation, making efficient use of the animal evidence while minimizing possible sources of bias. The extent to which systematic review and meta-analysis methods have been applied to evaluate animal experiments to inform human health is unknown. Using systematic review methods, we examine the extent and quality of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of in vivo animal experiments carried out to inform human health. We identified 103 articles meeting the inclusion criteria: 57 reported a systematic review, 29 a systematic review and a meta-analysis, and 17 reported a meta-analysis only. The use of these methods to evaluate animal evidence has increased over time. Although the reporting of systematic reviews is of adequate quality, the reporting of meta-analyses is poor. The inadequate reporting of meta-analyses observed here leads to questions on whether the most appropriate methods were used to maximize the use of the animal evidence to inform policy or decision-making. We recommend that guidelines proposed here be used to help improve the reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of animal experiments. Further consideration of the use and methodological quality and reporting of such studies is needed.

PMID:
16923604
DOI:
10.1080/10934520600655507
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Loading ...
Support Center