Improving the Certainty of Evidence in Animal Experiment Systematic Review/Meta-Analysis: An Empirical Study of the GRADE Method
10.12300/j.issn.1674-5817.2024.109
- VernacularTitle:提高动物实验系统评价/Meta分析的证据确定性：GRADE方法的实证研究
- Author:
Tengfei LI
1
;
Qingyong ZHENG
1
;
Jianguo XU
1
;
Yiyi LI
1
;
Yongjia ZHOU
1
;
Caihua XU
1
;
Mingyue ZHANG
1
;
Jiexiang TIAN
2
;
Gang WANG
2
;
Jinhui TIAN
1
Author Information
1. Evidence-based Medicine Center, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, China
2. Department of Rheumatology, The Affiliated Hospital of Gansu University of Chinese Medicine, Lanzhou 730000, China
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Animal experiment;
Systematic reviews;
Meta-analyses;
Grading of recommendations assessment, development and evaluation;
Certainty of evidence;
Evidence grading
- From:
Laboratory Animal and Comparative Medicine
2025;45(1):101-111
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Animal experiments are essential tools in biomedical research, serving as a bridge between basic research and clinical trials. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses (SRs/MAs) of animal experiments are crucial methods for integrating evidence from animal experiment, which can facilitate the translation of findings into clinical research, reduce translational risks, and promote resource integration in basic research. With the continuous development of the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology, its application in SRs/MAs of animal experiments has gained increasing attention. This article first outlines the principles and specific applications of the GRADE methodology in SRs/MAs of animal experiments, including qualitative descriptive systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and network meta-analyses. It then deeply analyzes the misuse of the GRADE methodology in practice, including incorrect evidence grading, improper classification of evidence, misapplication in qualitative systematic reviews, inconsistencies between the documentation of the upgrading and downgrading process and results, and inappropriate use for making recommendations. Furthermore, this article comprehensively discusses the factors influencing the grading of evidence certainty in SRs/MAs of animal experiments, including the impact of bias risk, indirectness, inconsistency, imprecision, and publication bias on evidence downgrading, as well as the role of large effect sizes and cross-species consistency in evidence upgrading. Finally, in response to the issues discussed, improvement strategies are proposed, including further research and optimization of the GRADE methodology for SRs/MAs of animal experiments, the development of reporting guidelines tailored to the characteristics of SRs/MAs in animal experiment research, and enhanced professional training for researchers in the GRADE methodology. This article aims to improve the quality of evidence in SRs/MAs of animal experiments, strengthen their reliability in clinical decision-making, and promote the more efficient translation of findings from animal experiment research into clinical practice.
