Animal experimentation constitutes a critical link between basic research and clinical application, making its research quality and translational efficiency paramount. Although considerable progress has been made in standardizing operational procedures and ethical guidelines, the standardization of outcome evaluation systems has significantly lagged, creating a key bottleneck that constrains the quality of biomedical research and evidence synthesis. This deficiency is manifested by pronounced heterogeneity in outcome selection across similar studies, incomplete methodological reporting, and disparate criteria for result interpretation, which severely impairs the comparability of findings and the evidence integration. To cope with this challenge, this paper systematically introduces a mature methodological tool from clinical research–the core outcome set (COS)–and explores its construction strategies and application potential in the field of animal experimentation. Given the extensive diversity of animal experiments, a pragmatic strategy of "focusing on key areas, implementing phased pilots, and promoting gradual expansion" should be adopted. This approach prioritizes the development of domain-specific COS for disease areas characterized by high research volume, urgent translational needs, and well-established animal models. A multi-source integration pathway for COS development is detailed, comprising systematic literature searches, methodological appraisals, and expert consensus, with the feasibility of leveraging artificial intelligence (AI) to enhance efficiency also being examined. The development and promotion of such COS are not intended to restrict scientific exploration; rather, they aim to establish a new, tiered evaluation paradigm consisting of "core outcomes" (mandatory), "recommended outcomes" (encouraged), and "exploratory outcomes" (optional). This framework is expected not only to enhance research quality through standardization and to adhere to the "3R" principles but also to accelerate the accumulation of high-quality evidence. This, in turn, provides a solid foundation for higher-level evidence synthesis, ultimately facilitating the effective translation of basic research findings into clinical practice and providing an essential methodological framework for scientific advancement in relevant disciplines.

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.

Animal experiments are an essential component of life sciences and medical research. However, the external validity and reliability of individual animal studies are frequently challenged by inherent limitations such as small sample sizes, high design heterogeneity, and poor reproducibility, which impede the effective translation of research findings into clinical practice. Systematic reviews and meta-analysis represent a key methodology for integrating existing evidence and enhancing the robustness of conclusions. Currently, however, the application of systematic reviews and meta-analysis in the field of animal experiments lacks standardized guidelines for their conduct and reporting, resulting in inconsistent quality and, to some extent, diminishing their evidence value. To address this issue, this paper aims to systematically delineate the reporting process for systematic reviews and meta-analysis of animal experiments and to propose a set of standardized recommendations that are both scientific and practical. The article's scope encompasses the entire process, from the preliminary preparatory phase [including formulating the population， intervention， comparison and outcome （PICO） question, assessing feasibility, and protocol pre-registration] to the key writing points for each section of the main report. In the core methods section, the paper elaborates on how to implement literature searches, establish eligibility criteria, perform data extraction, and assess the risk of bias, based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis （PRISMA) statement, in conjunction with relevant guidelines and tools such as Animal Research： Reporting of in Vivo Experiments （ARRIVE) and a risk of bias assessment tool developed by the Systematic Review Centre for Laboratory Animal Experimentation (SYRCLE). For the presentation of results, strategies are proposed for clear and transparent display using flow diagrams and tables of characteristics. The discussion section places particular emphasis on how to scientifically interpret pooled effects, thoroughly analyze sources of heterogeneity, evaluate the impact of publication bias, and cautiously discuss the validity and limitations of extrapolating findings from animal studies to clinical settings. Furthermore, this paper recommends adopting the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology to comprehensively grade the quality of evidence. Through a modular analysis of the entire reporting process, this paper aims to provide researchers in the field with a clear and practical guide, thereby promoting the standardized development of systematic reviews and meta-analysis of animal experiments and enhancing their application value in scientific decision-making and translational medicine.

Methodological quality assessment is a pivotal link between primary studies and reliable evidence-based practice,and an essential pathway for operationalizing the core principles of the Guide on Methodological Standards in Pharmacoepidemiology(2nd edition).A prevalent challenge in practice,however,is the conflation of appraising methodological robustness(risk of bias assessment)with verifying reporting transparency(adherence to reporting guidelines).This paper systematically addresses this fundamental challenge,beginning with a clear distinction between the essence and boundaries of these two concepts.On this basis,the article provides a comprehensive review of mainstream quality assessment tools,covering the methodological features and evolutionary trajectory of numerous instruments for interventional(e.g.,RoB 2,ROBINS-I),observational(e.g.,NOS,the JBI/SIGN/NIH series),secondary(e.g.,AMSTAR 2),and other specific types of studies such as health economic evaluations.Furthermore,a complete case study is used to illustrate the practical application of the ROBINS-I tool.The paper's central thesis advocates for an"appraisal-informed design"philosophy,urging a conceptual shift from the retrospective critique of existing literature to the prospective quality control of new research by internalizing appraisal standards as design principles,while also exploring the emerging paradigm of artificial intelligence in assisting assessment.This paper provides a comprehensive methodological reference for researchers and practitioners to prudently select appropriate assessment tools and to conduct rigorous critical appraisals of pharmacoepidemiological evidence.

Objective:To predict pre-treatment clinical parameters that are associated with poor response and prognosis to ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) in patients with primary biliary cholangitis (PBC) and to use second-line treatment drugs in the early stages to delay the progression of the disease so that patients can benefit from early-stage treatment.Methods:Patients diagnosed with PBC at the Second Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University from 2013 to 2022 were collected. Two hundred fifty-seven cases were screened in accordance with the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The response and prognosis conditions one year after treatment were followed up in outpatient and inpatient departments, as well as through telephone calls. Statistical analyses were performed using t-tests, Mann-Whitney U test, χ2 test, Fisher's exact test, and logistic regression analysis according to different data. Results:A total of 257 PBC cases were included, with 223 females (86.80%) and 34 males (13.20%). Univariate and multivariate binary logistic regression analyses showed that baseline high albumin levels [odds ratio ( OR): 0.882, 95% confidence interval ( CI): 0.805～0.967, P=0.008] were a protective factor for PBC patients' response to UDCA treatment after adjusting for different confounding factors, while baseline high alkaline phosphatase ( OR: 1.012, 95% CI: 1.008～1.016, P<0.001) and baseline high neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio (NLR) level ( OR: 1.462, 95% CI:1.079～1.981, P=0.014) were risk factors for a poor response to UDCA. Trend analysis showed that the baseline NLR quantile was positively correlated with the risk of poor response to UDCA ( OR: 5.512, 95% CI: 1.040～29.216, P=0.045) in patients with PBC. Cox proportional hazards regression analysis identified that age [hazard ratio ( HR): 1.050, 95% CI: 1.019～1.082] and NLR value ( HR:1.089, 95% CI:1.021～1.161) were independent influencing risk factors for all-cause mortality in PBC patients ( P<0.05). Conclusion:Baseline high albumin levels are protective factors against a poor biochemical response to UDCA, while baseline high alkaline phosphatase levels and high NLR are risk factors for a poor biochemical response to UDCA in patients with PBC. Additionally, baseline high NLR values are positively correlated with poor biochemical response to UDCA treatment.

OBJECTIVE To standardize the main processes and related technical links of the clinical comprehensive evaluation of drugs， and provide guidance and reference for improving the quality of comprehensive evaluation evidence and its transformation and application value. METHODS The construction of Guideline for the Workflow of Clinical Comprehensive Evaluation of Drugs was based on the standard guideline formulation method of the World Health Organization （WHO）， strictly followed the latest definition of guidelines by the Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States， and conformed to the six major areas of the Guideline Research and Evaluation Tool Ⅱ. Delphi method was adopted to construct the research questions； research evidence was established by applying the research methods of evidence-based medicine. The evidence quality classification system of the Chinese Evidence-Based Medicine Center was adopted for evidence classification and evaluation. The recommendation strength was determined by the recommendation strength classification standard formulated by the Oxford University Evidence-Based Medicine Center， and the recommendation opinions were formed through the expert consensus method. RESULTS & CONCLUSIONS The Guideline for the Workflow of Clinical Comprehensive Evaluation of Drugs covers 4 major categories of research questions， including topic selection， evaluation implementation， evidence evaluation， and application and transformation of results. The formulation of this guideline has standardized the technical links of the entire process of clinical comprehensive evaluation of drugs， which can effectively guide the high-quality and high-efficient development of this work， enhance the standardized output and transformation application value of evaluation evidence， and provide high-quality evidence support for the scientific decision-making of health and the rationalization of clinical medication.

Methodological quality assessment is a pivotal link between primary studies and reliable evidence-based practice,and an essential pathway for operationalizing the core principles of the Guide on Methodological Standards in Pharmacoepidemiology(2nd edition).A prevalent challenge in practice,however,is the conflation of appraising methodological robustness(risk of bias assessment)with verifying reporting transparency(adherence to reporting guidelines).This paper systematically addresses this fundamental challenge,beginning with a clear distinction between the essence and boundaries of these two concepts.On this basis,the article provides a comprehensive review of mainstream quality assessment tools,covering the methodological features and evolutionary trajectory of numerous instruments for interventional(e.g.,RoB 2,ROBINS-I),observational(e.g.,NOS,the JBI/SIGN/NIH series),secondary(e.g.,AMSTAR 2),and other specific types of studies such as health economic evaluations.Furthermore,a complete case study is used to illustrate the practical application of the ROBINS-I tool.The paper's central thesis advocates for an"appraisal-informed design"philosophy,urging a conceptual shift from the retrospective critique of existing literature to the prospective quality control of new research by internalizing appraisal standards as design principles,while also exploring the emerging paradigm of artificial intelligence in assisting assessment.This paper provides a comprehensive methodological reference for researchers and practitioners to prudently select appropriate assessment tools and to conduct rigorous critical appraisals of pharmacoepidemiological evidence.

Objective:To construct a temperature-sensitive hydrogel (PF-CA@AS-IV hydrogel) composed of Pluronic F-127 (PF-127)/calcium alginate (CA) loaded with astragaloside IV (AS-IV), and to explore its repair effect and potential mechanism on diabetic skin ulcers (DSU).Methods:The PF-CA@AS-IV hydrogel loaded with AS-IV and gelling at 37 ℃ was prepared. Its temperature sensitivity, rheological properties, and morphology were characterized. A rat model of DSU was established, and the rats were randomly divided into blank control group, model group, AS-IV spray group, PF-CA hydrogel group, and PF-CA@AS-IV hydrogel group ( n=5 each). After 21 days of intervention, the wound healing rate of each group was evaluated. Hematoxylin-eosin (HE) staining was used to observe the pathological changes of granulation tissue, and immunohistochemistry was applied to detect the expression level of CD34, a marker of new blood vessels. Results:Rheological analysis showed that the storage modulus (G′) of PF-CA@AS-IV hydrogel began to exceed the loss modulus (G″) at 33 ℃, and a stable three-dimensional network structure was formed at 37 ℃. Scanning electron microscopy confirmed its loose and porous microstructure. Animal experiment results indicated that compared with the blank control group, the model group had a significantly lower wound healing rate, massive infiltration of inflammatory cells, and fewer new capillaries and CD34 expression (all P<0.05). Compared with the model group, each treatment group can promote wound healing, reduce inflammatory infiltration and increase the positive expression of CD34 to varying degrees (all P<0.05), and the curative effect of PF-CA@AS-IV hydrogel group is the most significant, which is better than that of AS-IV spray group and PF-CA hydrogel group (all P<0.05). Conclusions:PF-CA@AS-IV hydrogel can effectively regulate inflammatory response and promote angiogenesis through sustained release of AS-IV, thereby accelerating DSU healing, and has good translational potential in the field of chronic wound repair.

Objective:To predict pre-treatment clinical parameters that are associated with poor response and prognosis to ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) in patients with primary biliary cholangitis (PBC) and to use second-line treatment drugs in the early stages to delay the progression of the disease so that patients can benefit from early-stage treatment.Methods:Patients diagnosed with PBC at the Second Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University from 2013 to 2022 were collected. Two hundred fifty-seven cases were screened in accordance with the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The response and prognosis conditions one year after treatment were followed up in outpatient and inpatient departments, as well as through telephone calls. Statistical analyses were performed using t-tests, Mann-Whitney U test, χ2 test, Fisher's exact test, and logistic regression analysis according to different data. Results:A total of 257 PBC cases were included, with 223 females (86.80%) and 34 males (13.20%). Univariate and multivariate binary logistic regression analyses showed that baseline high albumin levels [odds ratio ( OR): 0.882, 95% confidence interval ( CI): 0.805～0.967, P=0.008] were a protective factor for PBC patients' response to UDCA treatment after adjusting for different confounding factors, while baseline high alkaline phosphatase ( OR: 1.012, 95% CI: 1.008～1.016, P<0.001) and baseline high neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio (NLR) level ( OR: 1.462, 95% CI:1.079～1.981, P=0.014) were risk factors for a poor response to UDCA. Trend analysis showed that the baseline NLR quantile was positively correlated with the risk of poor response to UDCA ( OR: 5.512, 95% CI: 1.040～29.216, P=0.045) in patients with PBC. Cox proportional hazards regression analysis identified that age [hazard ratio ( HR): 1.050, 95% CI: 1.019～1.082] and NLR value ( HR:1.089, 95% CI:1.021～1.161) were independent influencing risk factors for all-cause mortality in PBC patients ( P<0.05). Conclusion:Baseline high albumin levels are protective factors against a poor biochemical response to UDCA, while baseline high alkaline phosphatase levels and high NLR are risk factors for a poor biochemical response to UDCA in patients with PBC. Additionally, baseline high NLR values are positively correlated with poor biochemical response to UDCA treatment.

Objective:To construct a temperature-sensitive hydrogel (PF-CA@AS-IV hydrogel) composed of Pluronic F-127 (PF-127)/calcium alginate (CA) loaded with astragaloside IV (AS-IV), and to explore its repair effect and potential mechanism on diabetic skin ulcers (DSU).Methods:The PF-CA@AS-IV hydrogel loaded with AS-IV and gelling at 37 ℃ was prepared. Its temperature sensitivity, rheological properties, and morphology were characterized. A rat model of DSU was established, and the rats were randomly divided into blank control group, model group, AS-IV spray group, PF-CA hydrogel group, and PF-CA@AS-IV hydrogel group ( n=5 each). After 21 days of intervention, the wound healing rate of each group was evaluated. Hematoxylin-eosin (HE) staining was used to observe the pathological changes of granulation tissue, and immunohistochemistry was applied to detect the expression level of CD34, a marker of new blood vessels. Results:Rheological analysis showed that the storage modulus (G′) of PF-CA@AS-IV hydrogel began to exceed the loss modulus (G″) at 33 ℃, and a stable three-dimensional network structure was formed at 37 ℃. Scanning electron microscopy confirmed its loose and porous microstructure. Animal experiment results indicated that compared with the blank control group, the model group had a significantly lower wound healing rate, massive infiltration of inflammatory cells, and fewer new capillaries and CD34 expression (all P<0.05). Compared with the model group, each treatment group can promote wound healing, reduce inflammatory infiltration and increase the positive expression of CD34 to varying degrees (all P<0.05), and the curative effect of PF-CA@AS-IV hydrogel group is the most significant, which is better than that of AS-IV spray group and PF-CA hydrogel group (all P<0.05). Conclusions:PF-CA@AS-IV hydrogel can effectively regulate inflammatory response and promote angiogenesis through sustained release of AS-IV, thereby accelerating DSU healing, and has good translational potential in the field of chronic wound repair.