Does the publication of SYRCLE＇s risk of bias tool improve the methodological quality of animal experiments?
Zhang Weiyi
Li Yanfei
Dai Yanrui
Feng Yue
Li Fuhan
Wang Renchun
Wu Zhenkun
Zhang Nan
Tao Gongcai
Shang Zhizhong
Zhang Yanying
Ma Bin
Yang Kehu
Abstract：comprehensively assess and compare the methodological quality of animal experiments published before and after the publication of SYRCLE’s risk of bias tool, find gaps and problems, thereby promoting the conversion and utilization of the results of animal experiments. Methods The Chinese Scientific Citation Database (CSCD) and Web of Science were searched from 2011 to October 2018. Document screening and data extraction were performed independently by four researchers. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed using the SYRCLE’s risk of bias tool. Statistical analysis was performed by SPSS23. Results A total of 5987 animal studies were included. Methodological quality assessment showed that 60% (6/10) of the items were rated as ＂low risk＂ in less than 30% of the included studies, of which 66.67% (4/6) were rated as ＂low risk＂ in less than 10% of the included studies. Although the quality of animal experiments published after 2014 was improved in ＂ sequence generation, baseline characteristics, random housing, incomplete data reporting and other bias＂ (P<0.001), there was no significant difference in ＂ allocation concealment＂ (P=1), and the ＂low risk＂ coincidence rates in "random outcome assessment and blind method" were even lower than that in previous studies (P<0.001). Conclusion The published animal experiments still have some methodological limitations, especially in random outcome assessment and blind method. Therefore, we suggest that it is necessary to take targeted measures to promote and popularize SYRCLE’s risk of bias tool, thereby improving the design and implementation of animal experiments.
Keywords：Animal experimentsSYRCLE’s risk of bias toolMethodological qualityLongitudinal comparative study
Publication Date：2019-01-01
Online Publishing Date：2025-08-15(First online date of this platform, not the publication date of the document)
Pages：5( 1165-1168,1173 )