Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 Sep 1;161(9):1949-1954.
doi: 10.1097/j.pain.0000000000001974.

A practical guide to preclinical systematic review and meta-analysis

Nadia Soliman  1 , Andrew S C Rice, Jan Vollert
Affiliations

A practical guide to preclinical systematic review and meta-analysis

Nadia Soliman et al. Pain. .
No abstract available

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Sponsorships or competing interests that may be relevant to content are disclosed at the end of this article.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
“Getting Started” Infographic. This is a “how to guide” and describes each stage of the SR and MA processes and the resources for learning and development as well as performing a review. MAs, meta-analyses; SRs, systematic reviews.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
An example of the systematic review workflow and the platforms that can be used at each stage.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
Automation technologies that are being developed for the different stages of the review process. Machine learning and text mining have improved the feasibility and efficiency of the early stages of the process, and tool development continues to ensure that the full potential of preclinical SRs are realised. Technological developments for the latter stages are in their infancy. However, we are currently developing a machine-assisted approach to extracting data from graphs that aims to reduce time and improve accuracy, a feature that will soon be integrated into SyRF. SRs, systematic reviews; SyRF, Systematic Review & Meta-analysis Facility.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Andrews NA, Latrémolière A, Basbaum AI, Mogil JS, Porreca F, Rice ASC, Woolf CJ, Currie GL, Dworkin RH, Eisenach JC, Evans S, Gewandter JS, Gover TD, Handwerker H, Huang W, Iyengar S, Jensen MP, Kennedy JD, Lee N, Levine J, Lidster K, Machin I, McDermott MP, McMahon SB, Price TJ, Ross SE, Scherrer G, Seal RP, Sena ES, Silva E, Stone L, Svensson CI, Turk DC, Whiteside G. Ensuring transparency and minimization of methodologic bias in preclinical pain research: PPRECISE considerations. PAIN 2016;157:901–9. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Bahor Z, Liao J, Macleod Malcolm R, Bannach-Brown A, McCann Sarah K, Wever Kimberley E, Thomas J, Ottavi T, Howells David W, Rice A, Ananiadou S, Sena E. Risk of bias reporting in the recent animal focal cerebral ischaemia literature. Clin Sci 2017;131:2525–32. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Bannach-Brown A, Przybyła P, Thomas J, Rice ASC, Ananiadou S, Liao J, Macleod MR. Machine learning algorithms for systematic review: reducing workload in a preclinical review of animal studies and reducing human screening error. Syst Rev 2019;8:23. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Bastian H, Glasziou P, Chalmers I. Seventy-five trials and eleven systematic reviews a day: how will we ever keep up? PLoS Med 2010;7:e1000326. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Campbell M, McKenzie JE, Sowden A, Katikireddi SV, Brennan SE, Ellis S, Hartmann-Boyce J, Ryan R, Shepperd S, Thomas J, Welch V, Thomson H. Synthesis without meta-analysis (SWiM) in systematic reviews: reporting guideline. BMJ 2020;368:l6890. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types