Methodological quality of systematic reviews of animal studies: a survey of reviews of basic research

Methodological quality of systematic reviews in dentistry including animal studies: a cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

The overall confidence in the results of systematic reviews including animal models can be heterogeneous. We assessed the methodological quality of systematic reviews including animal models in dentistry as well as the overall confidence in the results of those systematic reviews.

MATERIAL & METHODS

PubMed, Web of Science and Scopus were searched for systematic reviews including animal studies in dentistry published later than January 2010 until 18th of July 2022. Overall confidence in the results was assessed using a modified version of the A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews (AMSTAR-2) checklist. Checklist items were rated as yes, partial yes, no and not applicable. Linear regression analysis was used to investigate associations between systematic review characteristics and the overall adherence to the AMSTAR-2 checklist. The overall confidence in the results was calculated based on the number of critical and non-critical weaknesses presented in the AMSTAR-2 items and rated as high, moderate, low and critical low.

RESULTS

Of initially 951 retrieved systematic reviews, 190 were included in the study. The overall confidence in the results was low in 43 (22.6%) and critically low in 133 (70.0%) systematic reviews. While some AMSTAR-2 items were regularly reported (e.g. conflict of interest, selection in duplicate), others were not (e.g.

FUNDING

n = 1; 0.5%). Multivariable linear regression analysis showed that the adherence scores of AMSTAR-2 was significantly associated with publication year, journal impact factor (IF), topic, and the use of tools to assess risk of bias (RoB) of the systematic reviews.

CONCLUSION

Although the methodological quality of dental systematic reviews of animal models improved over the years, it is still suboptimal. The overall confidence in the results was mostly low or critically low. Systematic reviews, which were published later, published in a journal with a higher IF, focused on non-surgery topics, and used at least one tool to assess RoB correlated with greater adherence to the AMSTAR-2 guidelines.

Development of a reporting guideline for systematic reviews of animal experiments in the field of traditional Chinese medicine

OBJECTIVE

In recent years, there are several systematic reviews published on animal experiments of Traditional Chinese medicine (TCM). PRISMA (preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis) guidelines provide a guarantee for significantly improving the reporting quality of systematic reviews (SRs) and meta-analysis (MAs) to a certain extent; however, there are still certain defects found in the quality of SRs/MAs of animal experiments of TCM. It has been found that especially, the descriptions of the rationale and animal characteristics of TCM interventions are inadequate. As a result, we have developed a novel reporting guideline for SRs/MAs of animal experimental in the field of TCM (PRISMA-ATCM) to overcome these problems.

METHODS

PRISMA-ATCM reporting guidelines were formed by analyzing both the status and quality of published SRs/MAs of animal experiments and consulting experts in the related fields, and then by Delphi consultation, consensus meeting and revision.

RESULTS

Among the 27 items on the PRISMA checklist, Title (1), Structured summary (2), Rationale (3), Objectives (4), Protocol and registration (5), Eligibility criteria (6), Data items (11), Planned methods of analysis (14), Study characteristics (18), Summary of evidence (24), Limitations (25), and Funding (27) have been extensively revised and expanded, to specifically include the details about TCM intervention and animal characteristics. In addition, illustrative examples and explanations have been provided for each item.

CONCLUSION

PRISMA-ATCM could markedly improve the quality SRs/MAs of animal experiments in the field of TCM.

Reproducibility, relevance and reliability as barriers to efficient and credible biomedical technology translation

Biomedical research accuracy and relevance for improving healthcare are increasingly identified as costly problems. Basic research data quality, reporting and methodology, and reproducibility are common factors implicated in this challenge. Preclinical models of disease and therapy, largely conducted in rodents, have known deficiencies in replicating most human conditions. Their translation to human results is acknowledged to be poor for decades. Clinical data quality and quantity is also recognized as deficient; gold standard randomized clinical trials are expensive. Few solid conclusions from clinical studies are replicable and many remain unpublished. The translational pathway from fundamental biomedical research through to innovative solutions handed to clinical practitioners is therefore highly inefficient and costly in terms of wasted resources, early claims from fundamental discoveries never witnessed in humans, and few new, improved solutions available clinically for myriad diseases. Improving this biomedical research strategy and resourcing for reliability, translational relevance, reproducibility and clinical impact requires careful analysis and consistent enforcement at both funding and peer review levels.

Transduction Efficiency and Immunogenicity of Viral Vectors for Cochlear Gene Therapy: A Systematic Review of Preclinical Animal Studies

Background: Hearing impairment is the most frequent sensory deficit, affecting 466 million people worldwide and has been listed by the World Health Organization (WHO) as one of the priority diseases for research into therapeutic interventions to address public health needs. Inner ear gene therapy is a promising approach to restore sensorineural hearing loss, for which several gene therapy applications have been studied and reported in preclinical animal studies. Objective: To perform a systematic review on preclinical studies reporting cochlear gene therapy, with a specific focus on transduction efficiency. Methods: An initial PubMed search was performed on April 1st 2021 using the PRISMA methodology. Preclinical in vivo studies reporting primary data regarding transduction efficiency of gene therapy targeting the inner ear were included in this report. Results: Thirty-six studies were included in this review. Transduction of various cell types in the inner ear can be achieved, according to the viral vector used. However, there is significant variability in the applied vector delivery systems, including promoter, viral vector titer, etc. Conclusion: Although gene therapy presents a promising approach to treat sensorineural hearing loss in preclinical studies, the heterogeneity of methodologies impedes the identification of the most promising tools for future use in inner ear therapies.

AK, Pennisi CP. Quality of Reporting in Preclinical Urethral Tissue Engineering Studies: A Systematic Review to Assess Adherence to the ARRIVE Guidelines

Preclinical research within the area of urethral tissue engineering has not yet been successfully translated into an efficient therapeutic option for patients. This gap could be attributed, in part, to inadequate design and reporting of the studies employing laboratory animals. In this study, a systematic review was conducted to investigate the quality of reporting in preclinical studies utilizing tissue engineering approaches for urethral repair. The scope was on studies performed in rabbits, published between January 2014 and March 2020. Quality assessment of the data was conducted according to the Animal Research: Reporting of in Vivo Experiments (ARRIVE) guidelines by the scoring of a 38-item checklist in different categories. A total of 28 articles that fulfilled the eligibility criteria were included in the study. The range of ARRIVE score was from 0 to 100, taking into consideration having reported the item in question or not. The mean checklist score was 53%. The items that attained the highest scores included the number of animals utilized, the size of control and experimental groups, and the definition of experimental outcomes. The least frequently reported items included the data regarding the experimental procedure, housing and husbandry, determination and justification of the number of animals, and reporting of adverse events. Surprisingly, full disclosure about ethical guidelines and animal protocol approval was missing in 54% of the studies. No paper stated the sample size estimation. Overall, our study found that a large number of studies display inadequate reporting of fundamental information and that the quality of reporting improved marginally over the study period. We encourage a comprehensive implementation of the ARRIVE guidelines in animal studies exploring tissue engineering for urethral repair, not only to facilitate effective translation of preclinical research findings into clinical therapies, but also to ensure compliance with ethical principles and to minimize unnecessary animal studies.

Epidemiology and reporting characteristics of preclinical systematic reviews

In an effort to better utilize published evidence obtained from animal experiments, systematic reviews of preclinical studies are increasingly more common-along with the methods and tools to appraise them (e.g., SYstematic Review Center for Laboratory animal Experimentation [SYRCLE's] risk of bias tool). We performed a cross-sectional study of a sample of recent preclinical systematic reviews (2015-2018) and examined a range of epidemiological characteristics and used a 46-item checklist to assess reporting details. We identified 442 reviews published across 43 countries in 23 different disease domains that used 26 animal species. Reporting of key details to ensure transparency and reproducibility was inconsistent across reviews and within article sections. Items were most completely reported in the title, introduction, and results sections of the reviews, while least reported in the methods and discussion sections. Less than half of reviews reported that a risk of bias assessment for internal and external validity was undertaken, and none reported methods for evaluating construct validity. Our results demonstrate that a considerable number of preclinical systematic reviews investigating diverse topics have been conducted; however, their quality of reporting is inconsistent. Our study provides the justification and evidence to inform the development of guidelines for conducting and reporting preclinical systematic reviews.

Preclinical systematic review of ginsenoside Rg1 for cognitive impairment in Alzheimer's disease

Ginseng has been used for the treatment of aging and memory impairment for thousands of years. Several studies have found that ginsenoside Rg1, as one of the main active components of ginseng, could potentially improve cognitive function in several different animal models. A preclinical systematic review to evaluate the efficacy and mechanisms of ginsenoside Rg1 for ameliorating cognitive impairments in Alzheimer's disease is reported here. We searched six databases from their inceptions to January 2019. Thirty-two studies were selected, which included a total of 1,643 animals. According to various cognitive behavioral tests, the results of the meta-analyses showed that ginsenoside Rg1 significantly improved cognitive behavioral impairments in most Alzheimer's disease models (P < 0.05), but there were no significant effects in animals with neuronal degeneration induced by chronic stress or in SAMP8 transgenic mice. The potential mechanisms included antioxidant and anti-inflammatory effects, amelioration of Alzheimer's disease-related pathology, synapse protection, and up-regulation of nerve cells via multiple signaling pathways.

A Systematic Review of the MDMA Model to Address Social Impairment in Autism

BACKGROUND

Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) is a neurodevelopmental disorder characterised by repetitive behaviours, cognitive rigidity/inflexibility, and social-affective impairment. Unfortunately, no gold-standard treatments exist to alleviate the core socio-behavioural impairments of ASD. Meanwhile, the prosocial empathogen/entactogen 3,4-methylene-dioxy-methamphetamine (MDMA) is known to enhance sociability and empathy in both humans and animal models of psychological disorders.

OBJECTIVE

We review the evidence obtained from behavioural tests across the current literature, showing how MDMA can induce prosocial effects in animals and humans, where controlled experiments were able to be performed.

METHODS

Six electronic databases were consulted. The search strategy was tailored to each database. Only English-language papers were reviewed. Behaviours not screened in this review may have affected the core ASD behaviours studied. Molecular analogues of MDMA have not been investigated.

RESULTS

We find that the social impairments may potentially be alleviated by postnatal administration of MDMA producing prosocial behaviours in mostly the animal model.

CONCLUSION

MDMA and/or MDMA-like molecules appear to be an effective pharmacological treatment for the social impairments of autism, at least in animal models. Notably, clinical trials based on MDMA use are now in progress. Nevertheless, larger and more extended clinical studies are warranted to prove the assumption that MDMA and MDMA-like molecules have a role in the management of the social impairments of autism.

Preclinical Experiments for Hypospadias Surgery: Systematic Review and Quality Assessment

Background: There is a steadily growing number of different reconstructive surgical procedures for hypospadias that were tested on animal models prior to their human application. However, the clinical translatability and reproducibility of the results encountered in preclinical urethral reconstruction experiments is considered poor, with significant factors contributing to the poor design and reporting of animal experiments. Our objective was to evaluate the quality of the design and reporting in published articles of urethral reconstructive preclinical studies. Methods: Both PubMed and EMBASE databases were searched for animal urethral repair experiments between January 2014 and September 2019. Internal quality (bias) was evaluated through several signaling questions arising from the Systematic Review Centre for Laboratory animal Experimentation (SYRCLE), while the quality of reporting was assessed by the Animal Research: Reporting of In vivo Experiments (ARRIVE) guidelines by scoring of a 20-item checklist. Results: A total of 638 articles were initially screened after the literature search. Employing the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 30 studies were chosen for full-text screening and 21 studies were considered eligible for the quality assessment. The mean score of the checklist was 66%. The elements that accomplished the highest grades included the number of animals utilized, the number in each investigational and control group, and the delineation of investigational conclusions. The items that were least commonly stated comprised information about the experimental method, housing and husbandry, rationalization of the number of animals, and reporting of adverse events. No paper stated the sample size estimation. Conclusion: We found that several critical experiment design principles were poorly reported, which hinders a rigorous appraisal of the scientific quality and reproducibility of the experiments. A comprehensive implementation of the ARRIVE guidelines in animal studies exploring urethral repair is necessary to facilitate the effective translation of preclinical research findings into clinical therapies.

Role of MALDI-MSI in combination with 3D tissue models for early stage efficacy and safety testing of drugs and toxicants

Introduction: Three-dimensional (3D) cell cultures have become increasingly important materials to investigate biological processes and drug efficacy and toxicity. The ability of 3D cultures to mimic the physiology of primary tissues and organs in the human body enables further insight into cellular behavior and is hence highly desirable in early-stage drug development. Analyzing the spatial distribution of drug compounds and endogenous molecules provides an insight into the efficacy of a drug whilst simultaneously giving information on biological responses. Areas Covered: In this review we will examine the main 3D cell culture systems employed and applications, which describe their integration with mass spectrometry imaging (MSI). Expert Opinion: MSI is a powerful technique that can map a vast range of molecules simultaneously in tissues without the addition of labels that can provide insights into the efficacy and safety of a new drug. The combination of MSI and 3D cell cultures has emerged as a promising tool in early-stage drug analysis. However, the most common administration route for pharmaceutical drugs is via oral delivery. The use of MSI in combination with models of the GI tract is an area that has been little explored to date, the reasons for this are discussed.

Importance of Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses of Animal Studies: Challenges for Animal-to-Human Translation

Results of animal experiments are used for understanding the pathophysiology of diseases, assessing safety and efficacy of newly developed drugs, and monitoring environmental health hazards among others. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of animal data are important tools to condense animal evidence and translate the data into practical clinical applications. Such studies are conducted to explore heterogeneity, to generate new hypotheses about pathophysiology and treatment, to design new clinical trial modalities, and to test the efficacy and the safety of the various interventions. Here, we provide an overview regarding the importance of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of animal data and discuss common challenges and their potential solutions. Current evidence highlights various problems and challenges that surround these issues, including lack of generalizability of data obtained from animal models, failure in translating data obtained from animals to humans, poor experimental design and the reporting of the animal studies, heterogeneity of the data collected, and methodologic weaknesses of animal systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of animal studies can catalyze translational processes more effectively if they focus on a well-defined hypothesis along with addressing clear inclusion and exclusion criteria, publication bias, heterogeneity of the data, and a coherent and well-balanced assessment of studies' quality.

The biology and engineered modeling strategies of cancer-nerve crosstalk

A recent finding critical to cancer aggravation is the interaction between cancer cells and nerves. There exist two main modes of cancer-nerve interaction: perineural invasion (PNI) and tumor innervation. PNI occurs when cancer cells infiltrate the adjacent nerves, and its relative opposite, tumor innervation, occurs when axons extend into tumor bodies. Like most cancer studies, these crosstalk interactions have mostly been observed in patient samples and animal models at this point, making it difficult to understand the mechanisms in a controlled manner. As such, in recent years in vitro studies have emerged that have helped identify various microenvironmental factors responsible for cancer-nerve crosstalk, including but not limited to neurotrophic factors, neurotransmitters, chemokines, cancer-derived exosomes, and Schwann cells. The versatility of in vitro systems warrants continuous development to increase physiological relevance to study PNI and tumor innervation, for example by utilizing biomimetic three-dimensional (3D) culture systems. Despite the wealth of 3D in vitro cancer models, comparatively there exists a lack of 3D in vitro models of nerve, PNI, and tumor innervation. Native-like 3D in vitro models of cancer-nerve interactions may further help develop therapeutic strategies to curb nerve-mediated cancer aggravation. As such, we provide an overview of the key players of cancer-nerve crosstalk and current in vitro models of the crosstalk, as well as cancer and nerve models. We also discuss a few future directions in cancer-nerve crosstalk research.

Joining forces: the need to combine science and ethics to address problems of validity and translation in neuropsychiatry research using animal models

BACKGROUND

Current policies regulating the use of animals for scientific purposes are based on balancing between potential gain of knowledge and suffering of animals used in experimentation. The balancing process is complicated, on the one hand by plurality of views on our duties towards animals, and on the other hand by more recent discussions on uncertainty in the probability of reaching the final aim of the research and problems of translational failure.

METHODS

The study combines ethical analysis based on a literature review with neuropsychiatry-related preclinical research as a case study.

RESULTS

Based on the analysis and the case study we show that neuropsychiatry-related preclinical research is an especially interesting case from an ethical perspective. The 3R principles (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) are used to minimize the negative consequences for the animals used in research. However, neuropsychiatric research is characterized by specific challenges in assessing the probability of success of reaching the final aim, due to our limited mechanistic knowledge of human neuropsychiatric illness. Consequently, the translational value of the currently used animal models may be difficult to prove, which undermines the validity of these models and complicated the ethical assessment.

CONCLUSIONS

We conclude that a combined approach that deals with both science and the ethical dimensions is necessary to address the problems of validity and translation in neuropsychiatry-related preclinical research. We suggest this approach to comprise first, improved experimental methods, e.g. by using systematic reviews, second, a more patients-based approach that leads to models that reflect interindividual variation better, and third, more interdisciplinary cooperation.

Relationship between maternal global nutrient restriction during pregnancy and offspring kidney structure and function: a systematic review of animal studies

Maternal undernutrition during pregnancy is prevalent across the globe, and the origins of many chronic diseases can be traced back to in utero conditions. This systematic review considers the current evidence in animal models regarding the relationship between maternal global nutrient restriction during pregnancy and offspring kidney structure and function. CINAHL, Cochrane, EMBASE, MEDLINE, and Scopus were searched to November 2017. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis guidelines were followed, and articles were screened by two independent reviewers. Twenty-eight studies met the inclusion criteria: 16 studies were on rats, 9 on sheep, 2 on baboons, and 1 on goats. The majority of the rat studies had maternal global nutrient restriction during pregnancy at 50% of ad libitum while restriction for sheep and baboon studies ranged from 50% to 75%. Because of the heterogeneity of outcome measures and the large variation in the age of offspring at followup, no meta-analysis was possible. Common outcome measures included kidney weight, nephron number, glomerular size, glomerular filtration rate, and creatinine clearance. To date, there have been no studies assessing kidney function in large animal models. Most studies were rated as having a high or unknown risk of bias. The current body of evidence in animals suggests that exposure to maternal global nutrient restriction during pregnancy has detrimental effects on offspring kidney structure and function, such as lower kidney weight, lower nephron endowment, larger glomerular size, and lower glomerular filtration rate. Further long-term followup of studies in large animal models investigating kidney function through to adulthood are warranted.

Language Consideration and Methodological Transparency in "Systematic" Reviews of Animal Toxicity Studies

This study evaluated the use of non-English literature (NEL) in systematic reviews (SRs) or meta-analyses (MAs) of animal-based toxicity or communicable disease (CD) studies. A secondary goal was to assess how grant funding, country of primary authorship, or study quality reporting influenced the use of NEL in these reviews. Inclusion criteria and data extraction forms were based on a pilot evaluation of a 10% random sample of reviews that were identified from a PubMed search (2006 to May 2017). This search yielded 111 animal toxicity and 69 CD reviews. Reviews (33 animal toxicity and 32 CD studies) were included when the authors identified their work as an SR or MA, described a literature search strategy, and provided defined inclusion criteria. Extracted data included PubMed indexing of publication type, author affiliations, and grant funding. Language use was mentioned in the methods in 55% of the toxicity SRs and 69% of CD SRs, of which 44% (n = 8) and 41% (n = 9) were limited to English, respectively. Neither the study type, grant funding, nor first author country of affiliation was associated with an increased consideration of NEL. Study quality reporting was more common in SRs that considered multiple languages. Despite guidelines that encourage the use of NEL in SRs and translation tools, SR/MA authors often fail to report language inclusion or focus on English publications. Librarian involvement in SR can promote awareness of relevant NEL and collaborative and technological strategies to improve their incorporation into the SR process.

Content validation of a Critical Appraisal Tool for Reviewing Analgesia Studies (CATRAS) involving subjects incapable of self-reporting pain

Introduction

This article reports the content validation of a Critical Appraisal Tool designed to Review the quality of Analgesia Studies (CATRAS) involving subjects incapable of self-reporting pain and provide guidance as to the strengths and weakness of findings. The CATRAS quality items encompass 3 domains: level of evidence, methodological soundness, and grading of the pain assessment tool.

Objectives

To validate a critical appraisal tool for reviewing analgesia studies involving subjects incapable of self-reporting pain.

Methods

Content validation was achieved using Delphi methodology through panel consensus. A panel of 6 experts reviewed the CATRAS in 3 rounds and quantitatively rated the relevance of the instrument and each of its quality items to their respective domains.

Results

Content validation was achieved for each item of the CATRAS and the tool as a whole. Item-level content validity index and kappa coefficient were at least greater than 0.83 and 0.81, respectively, for all items except for one item in domain 2 that was later removed. Scale-level content validity index was 97% (excellent content validity).

Conclusions

This 67-item critical appraisal tool may enable critical and quantitative assessment of the quality of individual analgesia trials involving subjects incapable of self-reporting pain for use in systematic reviews and meta-analysis studies.

The methodological quality of systematic reviews indexed in the MEDLINE database

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to describe and analyse the methodology quality of the literature search protocols of systematic reviews and to assess the relevance of the search filter that applies PubMed for retrieving this type of publication of the MEDLINE database.

Design/methodology/approach

For the selection of the document type, a literature search about nutritional and metabolic diseases was carried out in MEDLINE and the PubMed filter was used for retrieving “Systematic Reviews”, selecting “Nutritional and Metabolic Diseases” from the Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) database as Major Topic to determine the area of knowledge. Data analysis was carried out using “External Logistic Biplot”, a novel multivariate statistical technique in the field of medical documentation.

Findings

The results highlight the large variability of the methodology used in the literature search protocols of the systematic reviews analysed and confirm the low precision of the filter used by PubMed for the recovery of systematic reviews.

Originality/value

The Logistic Biplot used in this research allows an optimal categorization of the different documentary typologies and classifies the documents by their methodological quality, demonstrating its usefulness for the future development of the bibliometric analysis.

What kind of systematic review should I conduct? A proposed typology and guidance for systematic reviewers in the medical and health sciences

BACKGROUND

Systematic reviews have been considered as the pillar on which evidence-based healthcare rests. Systematic review methodology has evolved and been modified over the years to accommodate the range of questions that may arise in the health and medical sciences. This paper explores a concept still rarely considered by novice authors and in the literature: determining the type of systematic review to undertake based on a research question or priority.

RESULTS

Within the framework of the evidence-based healthcare paradigm, defining the question and type of systematic review to conduct is a pivotal first step that will guide the rest of the process and has the potential to impact on other aspects of the evidence-based healthcare cycle (evidence generation, transfer and implementation). It is something that novice reviewers (and others not familiar with the range of review types available) need to take account of but frequently overlook. Our aim is to provide a typology of review types and describe key elements that need to be addressed during question development for each type.

CONCLUSIONS

In this paper a typology is proposed of various systematic review methodologies. The review types are defined and situated with regard to establishing corresponding questions and inclusion criteria. The ultimate objective is to provide clarified guidance for both novice and experienced reviewers and a unified typology with respect to review types.

Bilateral Common Carotid Artery Ligation in Sheep. Could These Animals be Used as Human Models for Vascular and Cerebral Research?

Experimental animals are still used in today’s medicine to understand better physiological or pathological processes, or to develop, for example better vascular prostheses. For that reason, these animals must show some similarities with humans, from the anatomical to the physiological point of view. When developing vascular prostheses, we have to evaluate if the graft will react in the expected way and if during experimental research there will be some factors that might influence the proper functioning of vascular prostheses in the human body. We observed the consequences of bilateral common carotid artery ligation (BCCAL) or Sham operation in seventeen healthy Merinolandschaf / Württemberg sheep, aged between 2 and 4 years, after testing new types of carbon-coated ARTECOR® and ADIPOGRAFT Ra 1vk 7/350 vascular prostheses. After the follow-up period the prostheses were extirpated, so the blood supply was provided from the vertebral arteries. Sheep in both groups were not sacrificed, but were observed for 18 months. After the observation period all sheep showed no physical or neurological changes and all are still alive. Animal responses to BCCAL are different, depending on the animal species, age, and condition. In sheep, bilateral blocking of the blood fl ow in the carotid bed seems to be conceivable since the brain was sufficiently supplied with blood from the vertebral arteries.

Identification and characterization of outcome measures reported in animal models of epilepsy: Protocol for a systematic review of the literature-A TASK2 report of the AES/ILAE Translational Task Force of the ILAE

Current antiseizure therapy is ineffective in approximately one third of people with epilepsy and is often associated with substantial side effects. In addition, most current therapeutic paradigms offer treatment, but not cure, and no therapies are able to modify the underlying disease, that is, can prevent or halt the process of epileptogenesis or alleviate the cognitive and psychiatric comorbidities. Preclinical research in the field of epilepsy has been extensive, but unfortunately, not all the animal models being used have been validated for their predictive value. The overall goal of TASK2 of the AES/ILAE Translational Task Force is to organize and coordinate systematic reviews on selected topics regarding animal research in epilepsy. Herein we describe our strategy. In the first part of the paper we provide an overview of the usefulness of systematic reviews and meta-analysis for preclinical research and explain the essentials for their conduct. Then we describe in detail the protocol for a first systematic review, which will focus on the identification and characterization of outcome measures reported in animal models of epilepsy. The specific goals of this study are to define systematically the phenotypic characteristics of the most commonly used animal models, and to effectively compare these with the manifestations of human epilepsy. This will provide epilepsy researchers with detailed information on the strengths and weaknesses of epilepsy models, facilitating their refinement and future research. Ultimately, this could lead to a refined use of relevant models for understanding the mechanism(s) of the epilepsies and developing novel therapies.

Alcohol's Effects on the Brain: Neuroimaging Results in Humans and Animal Models

Brain imaging technology has allowed researchers to conduct rigorous studies of the dynamic course of alcoholism through periods of drinking, sobriety, and relapse and to gain insights into the effects of chronic alcoholism on the human brain. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) studies have distinguished alcohol-related brain effects that are permanent from those that are reversible with abstinence. In support of postmortem neuropathological studies showing degeneration of white matter, MRI studies have shown a specific vulnerability of white matter to chronic alcohol exposure. Such studies have demonstrated white-matter volume deficits as well as damage to selective gray-matter structures. Diffusion tensor imaging (DTI), by permitting microstructural characterization of white matter, has extended MRI findings in alcoholics. MR spectroscopy (MRS) allows quantification of several metabolites that shed light on brain biochemical alterations caused by alcoholism. This article focuses on MRI, DTI, and MRS findings in neurological disorders that commonly co-occur with alcoholism, including Wernicke's encephalopathy, Korsakoff's syndrome, and hepatic encephalopathy. Also reviewed are neuroimaging findings in animal models of alcoholism and related neurological disorders. This report also suggests that the dynamic course of alcoholism presents a unique opportunity to examine brain structural and functional repair and recovery.

Implementing systematic review techniques in chemical risk assessment: Challenges, opportunities and recommendations

Systematic review (SR) is a rigorous, protocol-driven approach designed to minimise error and bias when summarising the body of research evidence relevant to a specific scientific question. Taking as a comparator the use of SR in synthesising research in healthcare, we argue that SR methods could also pave the way for a "step change" in the transparency, objectivity and communication of chemical risk assessments (CRA) in Europe and elsewhere. We suggest that current controversies around the safety of certain chemicals are partly due to limitations in current CRA procedures which have contributed to ambiguity about the health risks posed by these substances. We present an overview of how SR methods can be applied to the assessment of risks from chemicals, and indicate how challenges in adapting SR methods from healthcare research to the CRA context might be overcome. Regarding the latter, we report the outcomes from a workshop exploring how to increase uptake of SR methods, attended by experts representing a wide range of fields related to chemical toxicology, risk analysis and SR. Priorities which were identified include: the conduct of CRA-focused prototype SRs; the development of a recognised standard of reporting and conduct for SRs in toxicology and CRA; and establishing a network to facilitate research, communication and training in SR methods. We see this paper as a milestone in the creation of a research climate that fosters communication between experts in CRA and SR and facilitates wider uptake of SR methods into CRA.

Maternal immunity and pregnancy outcome: focus on preconception and autophagy

Modulation of the maternal immune system before conception has a major role in determining subsequent pregnancy outcome. However, this has been a neglected area of investigation. There is a correlation between the length of time a woman is exposed to semen from her male partner and the development of regulatory T cells that limit a maternal antifetal immune response. Similarly, the composition of the vaginal microbiota influences the capacity of microorganisms to bypass the cervical barrier and colonize the uterus before pregnancy. The extent that this preconception colonization influences pre- and post-implantation gestational events depends on the types of microbes present, the genetic make-up of the mother and environmental influences on the magnitude and direction of her immune responses. Prepregnancy uterine and placental colonization with commensal bacteria may be beneficial to the fetus and newborn by generating tolerance to organisms that enhance postnatal well-being. Efforts to prevent or stop the progression of premature myometrial contractions have been limited because of an incomplete understanding of the mechanism(s) that trigger this occurrence. Based on recent studies of autophagy during gestation and parturition, inhibition of autophagy in myometrial cells may be the critical factor leading to a sequence of events culminating in induction of myometrial contractions either prematurely or at term.

The usefulness of systematic reviews of animal experiments for the design of preclinical and clinical studies

The question of how animal studies should be designed, conducted, and analyzed remains underexposed in societal debates on animal experimentation. This is not only a scientific but also a moral question. After all, if animal experiments are not appropriately designed, conducted, and analyzed, the results produced are unlikely to be reliable and the animals have in effect been wasted. In this article, we focus on one particular method to address this moral question, namely systematic reviews of previously performed animal experiments. We discuss how the design, conduct, and analysis of future (animal and human) experiments may be optimized through such systematic reviews. In particular, we illustrate how these reviews can help improve the methodological quality of animal experiments, make the choice of an animal model and the translation of animal data to the clinic more evidence-based, and implement the 3Rs. Moreover, we discuss which measures are being taken and which need to be taken in the future to ensure that systematic reviews will actually contribute to optimizing experimental design and thereby to meeting a necessary condition for making the use of animals in these experiments justified.

Animal Models in Cardiovascular Research: Hypertension and Atherosclerosis

Hypertension and atherosclerosis are among the most common causes of mortality in both developed and developing countries. Experimental animal models of hypertension and atherosclerosis have become a valuable tool for providing information on etiology, pathophysiology, and complications of the disease and on the efficacy and mechanism of action of various drugs and compounds used in treatment. An animal model has been developed to study hypertension and atherosclerosis for several reasons. Compared to human models, an animal model is easily manageable, as compounding effects of dietary and environmental factors can be controlled. Blood vessels and cardiac tissue samples can be taken for detailed experimental and biomolecular examination. Choice of animal model is often determined by the research aim, as well as financial and technical factors. A thorough understanding of the animal models used and complete analysis must be validated so that the data can be extrapolated to humans. In conclusion, animal models for hypertension and atherosclerosis are invaluable in improving our understanding of cardiovascular disease and developing new pharmacological therapies.

Dissemination bias in systematic reviews of animal research: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Systematic reviews of preclinical studies, in vivo animal experiments in particular, can influence clinical research and thus even clinical care. Dissemination bias, selective dissemination of positive or significant results, is one of the major threats to validity in systematic reviews also in the realm of animal studies. We conducted a systematic review to determine the number of published systematic reviews of animal studies until present, to investigate their methodological features especially with respect to assessment of dissemination bias, and to investigate the citation of preclinical systematic reviews on clinical research.

METHODS

Eligible studies for this systematic review constitute systematic reviews that summarize in vivo animal experiments whose results could be interpreted as applicable to clinical care. We systematically searched Ovid Medline, Embase, ToxNet, and ScienceDirect from 1st January 2009 to 9th January 2013 for eligible systematic reviews without language restrictions. Furthermore we included articles from two previous systematic reviews by Peters et al. and Korevaar et al.

RESULTS

The literature search and screening process resulted in 512 included full text articles. We found an increasing number of published preclinical systematic reviews over time. The methodological quality of preclinical systematic reviews was low. The majority of preclinical systematic reviews did not assess methodological quality of the included studies (71%), nor did they assess heterogeneity (81%) or dissemination bias (87%). Statistics quantifying the importance of clinical research citing systematic reviews of animal studies showed that clinical studies referred to the preclinical research mainly to justify their study or a future study (76%).

DISCUSSION

Preclinical systematic reviews may have an influence on clinical research but their methodological quality frequently remains low. Therefore, systematic reviews of animal research should be critically appraised before translating them to a clinical context.

Systematic reviews and meta-analysis of preclinical studies: why perform them and how to appraise them critically

The use of systematic review and meta-analysis of preclinical studies has become more common, including those of studies describing the modeling of cerebrovascular diseases. Empirical evidence suggests that too many preclinical experiments lack methodological rigor, and this leads to inflated treatment effects. The aim of this review is to describe the concepts of systematic review and meta-analysis and consider how these tools may be used to provide empirical evidence to spur the field to improve the rigor of the conduct and reporting of preclinical research akin to their use in improving the conduct and reporting of randomized controlled trials in clinical research. As with other research domains, systematic reviews are subject to bias. Therefore, we have also suggested guidance for their conduct, reporting, and critical appraisal.

Systematic reviews of animal studies; missing link in translational research?

BACKGROUND

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.

OBJECTIVES

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.

DATA SOURCES

We systematically searched Pubmed and Embase for SRs of preclinical animal studies published between 2005 and 2012.

RESULTS

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.

CONCLUSIONS

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.

Improving Bioscience Research Reporting: The ARRIVE Guidelines for Reporting Animal Research

In the last decade the number of bioscience journals has increased enormously, with many filling specialised niches reflecting new disciplines and technologies. The emergence of open-access journals has revolutionised the publication process, maximising the availability of research data. Nevertheless, a wealth of evidence shows that across many areas, the reporting of biomedical research is often inadequate, leading to the view that even if the science is sound, in many cases the publications themselves are not “fit for purpose”, meaning that incomplete reporting of relevant information effectively renders many publications of limited value as instruments to inform policy or clinical and scientific practice [1–21]. A recent review of clinical research showed that there is considerable cumulative waste of financial resources at all stages of the research process, including as a result of publications that are unusable due to poor reporting [22]. It is unlikely that this issue is confined to clinical research [2–14,16–20].

The ethical dimension in published animal research in critical care: the public face of science

INTRODUCTION

The ethical quality of animal research is important for many reasons, including for maintaining public support. We aimed to determine the reported attention to the ethical dimensions of the 3Rs (Refinement, Reduction, and Replacement) in critical care animal research published in 2012.

METHODS

A data-collection form and instruction manual were created based on published recommendations, and completed for all consecutive critical care animal research (using mammals) publications from January to June 2012 in three critical care journals. Predefined subgroups were by journal, sepsis model, and animal age, compared by using the χ2 statistic, with statistical significance accepted at P < 0.05.

RESULTS

In total, 77 consecutive animal research publications were reviewed. Most studies did not report monitoring the level of anesthesia during invasive procedures, even when muscle paralytics were used, nor monitoring or treatment of expected pain. When euthanasia was used, the method was often not stated, and when stated, most methods were not appropriate for the species. A sample-size calculation was rarely used, and animal numbers were often poorly described. No studies performed a systematic review to ensure that the animal research would be useful and not simple repetition. Seventeen (22%) publications met the composite outcome of, if indicated, using anesthesia and pain control, and stating the method of euthanasia. Most studies were funded with public funds (foundation or government funding). Sepsis models less often met the composite outcome of, if indicated, using anesthesia and pain control, and stating the method of euthanasia (2 (7%) of 27 versus 15 (30%) of 50; P = 0.023). No other statistically significant differences were found in reporting of any criterion by animal age, sepsis model, or journal.

CONCLUSIONS

Reported (although not necessarily actual) ethical quality of animal research in three high-impact critical care journals during 6 months of 2012 was poor. This has important implications for the practice of critical care animal research.

The quality of nutrition and cancer reviews: a systematic assessment

The methodological quality of published reviews of nutrition and cancer (2008-2009) and of the carcinogenicity of acrylamide (1999-2009) was systematically assessed. Each review was examined with respect to four characteristics: whether the purpose of the review was explicitly stated, whether a methods section (detailing the methods used to "weigh" the evidence) was included, whether "weight of evidence" methods were described elsewhere in the paper (e.g., in the discussion), and finally, whether references to recognized "weight of evidence" methods were included. In this study, ninety per cent of a systematically selected sample of recent reviews on nutrition and cancer published in 2008-2009 and 74% of reviews on acrylamide on cancer published in 1999-2009 were found to be methodologically troublesome or frankly unsound. Failure of peer review and editorial oversight are possible explanations, suggesting a broad lack of concern about this issue in the scientific community. If peer reviewers in the nutrition and cancer community do not require "weight of evidence" methods, then these methods may not appear in the published reviews. Similarly, if journal editors (or editorial policies) do not require methods sections in literature reviews, then these sections may not appear. The prerogative of the author(s) seems the most likely determinant of whether a systematic approach is used or not in nutrition and cancer reviews.

Publication bias in animal research: a systematic review protocol

BACKGROUND

Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of pre-clinical studies, in vivo animal experiments in particular, can influence clinical care. Publication bias is one of the major threats of validity in systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Previous empirical studies suggested that systematic reviews and meta-analyses have become more prevalent until 2010 and found evidence for compromised methodological rigor with a trend towards improvement. We aim to comprehensively summarize and update the evidence base on systematic reviews and meta-analyses of animal studies, their methodological quality and assessment of publication bias in particular.

METHODS/DESIGN

The objectives of this systematic review are as follows: •To investigate the epidemiology of published systematic reviews of animal studies until present. •To examine methodological features of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of animal studies with special attention to the assessment of publication bias. •To investigate the influence of systematic reviews of animal studies on clinical research by examining citations of the systematic reviews by clinical studies. Eligible studies for this systematic review constitute systematic reviews and meta-analyses that summarize in vivo animal experiments with the purpose of reviewing animal evidence to inform human health. We will exclude genome-wide association studies and animal experiments with the main purpose to learn more about fundamental biology, physical functioning or behavior. In addition to the inclusion of systematic reviews and meta-analyses identified by other empirical studies, we will systematically search Ovid Medline, Embase, ToxNet, and ScienceDirect from 2009 to January 2013 for further eligible studies without language restrictions. Two reviewers working independently will assess titles, abstracts, and full texts for eligibility and extract relevant data from included studies. Data reporting will involve a descriptive summary of meta-analyses and systematic reviews.

DISCUSSION

Results are expected to be publicly available later in 2013 and may form the basis for recommendations to improve the quality of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of animal studies and their use with respect to clinical care.

Progress in using systematic reviews of animal studies to improve translational research

Carlijn Hooijmans and colleagues discuss developments that might improve the quality and translation of animal research, focusing on the importance of systematic reviews, the role of an international register of animal studies, and cooperation across the scientific community. Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary

Look back in anger - what clinical studies tell us about preclinical work

Misled by animal studies and basic research? Whenever we take a closer look at the outcome of clinical trials in a field such as, most recently, stroke or septic shock, we see how limited the value of our preclinical models was. For all indications, 95% of drugs that enter clinical trials do not make it to the market, despite all promise of the (animal) models used to develop them. Drug development has started already to decrease its reliance on animal models: In Europe, for example, despite increasing R&D expenditure, animal use by pharmaceutical companies dropped by more than 25% from 2005 to 2008. In vitro studies are likewise limited: questionable cell authenticity, over-passaging, mycoplasma infections, and lack of differentiation as well as non-homeostatic and non-physiologic culture conditions endanger the relevance of these models. The standards of statistics and reporting often are poor, further impairing reliability. Alarming studies from industry show miserable reproducibility of landmark studies. This paper discusses factors contributing to the lack of reproducibility and relevance of pre-clinical research.

THE CONCLUSION

Publish less but of better quality and do not rely on the face value of animal studies.

Publication bias in laboratory animal research: a survey on magnitude, drivers, consequences and potential solutions

Context

Publication bias jeopardizes evidence-based medicine, mainly through biased literature syntheses. Publication bias may also affect laboratory animal research, but evidence is scarce.

Objectives

To assess the opinion of laboratory animal researchers on the magnitude, drivers, consequences and potential solutions for publication bias. And to explore the impact of size of the animals used, seniority of the respondent, working in a for-profit organization and type of research (fundamental, pre-clinical, or both) on those opinions.

Design

Internet-based survey.

Setting

All animal laboratories in The Netherlands.

Participants

Laboratory animal researchers.

Main Outcome Measure(s)

Median (interquartile ranges) strengths of beliefs on 5 and 10-point scales (1: totally unimportant to 5 or 10: extremely important).

Results

Overall, 454 researchers participated. They considered publication bias a problem in animal research (7 (5 to 8)) and thought that about 50% (32–70) of animal experiments are published. Employees (n = 21) of for-profit organizations estimated that 10% (5 to 50) are published. Lack of statistical significance (4 (4 to 5)), technical problems (4 (3 to 4)), supervisors (4 (3 to 5)) and peer reviewers (4 (3 to 5)) were considered important reasons for non-publication (all on 5-point scales). Respondents thought that mandatory publication of study protocols and results, or the reasons why no results were obtained, may increase scientific progress but expected increased bureaucracy. These opinions did not depend on size of the animal used, seniority of the respondent or type of research.

Conclusions

Non-publication of “negative” results appears to be prevalent in laboratory animal research. If statistical significance is indeed a main driver of publication, the collective literature on animal experimentation will be biased. This will impede the performance of valid literature syntheses. Effective, yet efficient systems should be explored to counteract selective reporting of laboratory animal research.

Pharmacologic reduction of angiographic vasospasm in experimental subarachnoid hemorrhage: systematic review and meta-analysis

Animal models have been developed to simulate angiographic vasospasm secondary to subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) and to test pharmacologic treatments. Our aim was to evaluate the effect of pharmacologic treatments that have been tested in humans and in preclinical studies to determine if animal models inform results reported in humans. A systematic review and meta-analysis of SAH studies was performed. We investigated predictors of translation from animals to humans with multivariate logistic regression. Pharmacologic reduction of vasospasm was effective in mice, rats, rabbits, dogs, nonhuman primates (standard mean difference of -1.74; 95% confidence interval -2.04 to -1.44) and humans. Animal studies were generally of poor methodologic quality and there was evidence of publication bias. Subgroup analysis by drug and species showed that statins, tissue plasminogen activator, erythropoietin, endothelin receptor antagonists, calcium channel antagonists, fasudil, and tirilazad were effective whereas magnesium was not. Only evaluation of vasospasm >3 days after SAH was independently associated with successful translation. We conclude that reduction of vasospasm is effective in animals and humans and that evaluation of vasospasm >3 days after SAH may be preferable for preclinical models.

A step-by-step guide to systematically identify all relevant animal studies

Before starting a new animal experiment, thorough analysis of previously performed experiments is essential from a scientific as well as from an ethical point of view. The method that is most suitable to carry out such a thorough analysis of the literature is a systematic review (SR). An essential first step in an SR is to search and find all potentially relevant studies. It is important to include all available evidence in an SR to minimize bias and reduce hampered interpretation of experimental outcomes. Despite the recent development of search filters to find animal studies in PubMed and EMBASE, searching for all available animal studies remains a challenge. Available guidelines from the clinical field cannot be copied directly to the situation within animal research, and although there are plenty of books and courses on searching the literature, there is no compact guide available to search and find relevant animal studies. Therefore, in order to facilitate a structured, thorough and transparent search for animal studies (in both preclinical and fundamental science), an easy-to-use, step-by-step guide was prepared and optimized using feedback from scientists in the field of animal experimentation. The step-by-step guide will assist scientists in performing a comprehensive literature search and, consequently, improve the scientific quality of the resulting review and prevent unnecessary animal use in the future.

Designing phenotyping studies for genetically engineered mice

A phenotyping study records physiologic or morphologic changes in an experimental animal resulting from an intervention. In mice, this intervention is most frequently genetic, but it may be any type of experimental manipulation. Accurate representation of the human condition under study is essential if the model is to yield useful conclusions. In this review, general approaches to the design of phenotyping studies are considered. These approaches take into account major sources of reduced model validity, such as unexpected phenotypic variation in mice, evolutionary divergence between mice and humans, unanticipated sources of variation, and common design errors. As poor design is the most common reason why studies fail to yield enduring results, emphasis is placed on reduction of bias, sampling, controlled study design, and appropriate statistical analysis.

The methodological quality of systematic reviews of animal studies in dentistry

Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of animal studies are important for improving estimates of the effects of treatment and for guiding future clinical studies on humans. The purpose of this systematic review was to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of animal studies in dentistry through using a validated checklist. A literature search was conducted independently and in duplicate in the PubMed and LILACS databases. References in selected systematic reviews were assessed to identify other studies not captured by the electronic searches. The methodological quality of studies was assessed independently and in duplicate by using the AMSTAR checklist; the quality was scored as low, moderate, or high. The reviewers were calibrated before the assessment and agreement between them was assessed using Cohen's Kappa statistic. Of 444 studies retrieved, 54 systematic reviews were selected after full-text assessment. Agreement between the reviewers was regarded as excellent. Only two studies were scored as high quality; 17 and 35 studies were scored as medium and low quality, respectively. There is room for improvement of the methodological quality of systematic reviews of animal studies in dentistry. Checklists, such as AMSTAR, can guide researchers in planning and executing systematic reviews and meta-analyses. For determining the need for additional investigations in animals and in order to provide good data for potential application in human, such reviews should be based on animal experiments performed according to sound methodological principles.

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

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).

Do corticosteroids have a role in preventing or reducing acute toxic lung injury caused by inhalation of chemical agents?

OBJECTIVE

To assess the evidence that treatment with corticosteroids improves the outcome in those exposed to lung-damaging agents.

METHODS

We searched Pubmed, Toxnet, Cochrane database, Google Scholar, and Embase from 1966 to January 2010 using the search terms "steroid", "corticosteroid", "lung injury", "lung damage", and "inhalation". These searches identified 287 papers of which 118 contained information on animal studies. However, most were reviews or case reports and only a few were controlled animal experiments of which 13 were considered relevant. ROLE OF CORTICOSTEROIDS:

ANIMAL STUDIES

Corticosteroids have no beneficial effect at the alveolar level on acute lung injury, which is caused by inhalation of poorly water-soluble compounds (e.g. nitrogen dioxide, ozone, phosgene) or following severe exposure to water-soluble compounds (e.g. chlorine, ammonia). In the recovery phase, corticosteroids may even be harmful, because corticosteroids hamper the division of type II alveolar cells and hamper the differentiation from type II into type I alveolar cells. The latter is important for the re-epithelialization of the alveolus and removal of excess of water in the alveolus. Furthermore, the quality of animal studies does not always allow extrapolation to human exposures. Differences between humans and animals in anatomy, pulmonary defense systems, breathing physiology, as well as the way the animals have been exposed, and the timing and route of corticosteroids in animal studies make predictions difficult. ROLE OF CORTICOSTEROIDS:

HUMAN STUDIES

An abundance of uncontrolled case reports and a few human crossover studies have evaluated the outcome of human volunteers exposed to various lung-damaging agents. Only a few reports contained systematic information on corticosteroid treatment. Data on the efficacy of corticosteroids after human exposure to lung-damaging agents are inconclusive. Often the number of patients involved is small or the severity of exposure is unclear or not well determined. These reports are therefore limited in their ability to establish a cause-effect relationship for the treatments involved. In some studies involving mild to moderate exposure to water-soluble agents (e.g. chlorine, ammonia), corticosteroid treatment was beneficial for some physiological parameters, such as airway resistance or arterial oxygen tension. However, severe lung injury and inflammation appear not to be improved by corticosteroid treatment. The optimal duration of treatment to obtain these beneficial effects has not been assessed adequately, but it only seems to be useful in the first hours after exposure. Generally, studies evaluating exposure to water-soluble compounds have too short a follow-up, which hampers the evaluation of the efficacy of corticosteroid treatment. The results of studies with longer follow-up suggest that the initial slight improvement in some variables is lost several hours after exposure.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical data on the efficacy of corticosteroids after human exposure to lung-damaging agents are inconclusive as the number of well-structured controlled studies is small and the indications for administration of corticosteroids are unclear. There have been no human controlled studies of high-dose exposure to lung-damaging agents. Furthermore, treatment with corticosteroids is limited by the potential side effects, such as prolonged neuromuscular weakness, deregulation of glucose metabolism, superinfection, and sepsis, which could diminish the chances for recovery.

Using a virtual patient activity to teach nurse prescribing

The Faculty of Health and Social Care Sciences at Kingston University/St George's University of London (KU/SGUL) provides a module to train registered nurses to qualify as independent nurse prescribers. During the programme the participants engage in an online learning activity using a virtual patient (VP). The aim of this VP activity is to enable students to consolidate their learning and to practice the range of skills that the students have been developing related to prescribing. The activity was designed by the module leader and was run as a pilot on two groups of students (n = 34). An evaluative study was undertaken on the value of this blended learning activity to the student and their prescribing practice. This paper presents the development, implementation and evaluation of the VP activity. Findings showed that the VP activity was perceived as being particular useful for helping them to learn the skills of patient history/assessment, decision-making and prescription writing. The VP was also perceived as being helpful in developing their confidence.