OBJECTIVE To further standardize the technical operations and management processes throughout therapeutic drug monitoring （TDM）， clarify the clinical value of TDM implementation， improve the scientific validity and reliability of monitoring results， and provide a solid reference basis for the formulation and optimization of clinical individualized precision dosing regimens. METHODS The Guidelines for the Management of Therapeutic Drug Monitoring were formulated in accordance with the latest definition of guidelines by the Institute of Medicine of the National Academies and the standard guideline development methodology of the World Health Organization， and in compliance with the requirements of the appraisal of guidelines for research and evaluation. A modified Delphi method was adopted to establish the research question system； evidence-based medicine research methods were applied to systematically search multiple databases to screen the latest and most comprehensive evidence. Evidence was graded and evaluated based on the evidence grading system of the Chinese Evidence-Based Medicine Center， and the grading criteria for recommendation strength from the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine were used to determine the recommendation strength. The recommendation opinions were formed through multidisciplinary expert consensus. RESULTS The Guidelines for the Management of Therapeutic Drug Monitoring cover four core modules， including TDM application indications， technical procedures， result interpretation and clinical application， and quality control， involving 18 primary research questions， 34 secondary research questions， and yield 82 recommendations. CONCLUSIONS The guidelines systematically standardize the key technical links and management requirements of the whole TDM process， provide scientific and operable standardized tools， help improve the standardization level of TDM work， promote the translation of monitoring results into clinical decision-making， and provide strong support for precision personalized medicine and ensuring the safety and rationality of medication use.

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.

Acute lung injury （ALI） is a life-threatening condition characterized by uncontrolled pulmonary inflammatory responses， presenting high morbidity and mortality rates that pose serious threats to patient health. The pathogenesis of ALI involves complex interactions among pathological mechanisms including immune-inflammatory responses， disruption of the alveolar-capillary barrier， mesenchymal stem cell dysfunction， metabolic disorders， ferroptosis， and alterations in the gut microbiota. The dysregulation of programmed cell death （PCD） has increasingly emerged as a research focus. PCD represents a genetically regulated autonomous process of cell death， crucial for maintaining the internal stability of organisms. Recent studies indicate that multiple PCD modes， including apoptosis， pyroptosis， necroptosis， autophagy， and ferroptosis， participate in the development and progression of ALI by mediating pathological processes such as alveolar epithelial cell injury and vascular endothelial barrier disruption. Current therapeutic approaches for ALI encompass lung-protective ventilation， body fluid management， mesenchymal stem cell therapy， and pharmacological interventions. While these measures may alleviate clinical symptoms， they remain unable to reverse the pathological progression of lung injury. Traditional Chinese medicine （TCM） possesses the unique advantages of a holistic perspective and syndrome differentiation-based treatment， achieving breakthrough progress in targeted PCD intervention for ALI. It can mitigate pulmonary tissue injury by suppressing inflammatory responses， regulating immune function， and improving coagulation disorders， thereby delaying the onset and progression of ALI. This paper delves into the molecular mechanisms of PCD in ALI， systematically reviewing the effects of TCM extracts， active constituents （terpenoids， saponins， flavonoids， and phenols）， and compound formulas （e.g.， Qingjie Huagong prescription， Maxing Kugan Tang， and Yifei Jianpi prescription） in improving pulmonary epithelial cell function and mitigating lung injury by modulating PCD pathways. This review aims to provide theoretical underpinnings and novel directions for drug development in the clinical prevention and treatment of ALI.

Acute lung injury （ALI） is a life-threatening condition characterized by uncontrolled pulmonary inflammatory responses， presenting high morbidity and mortality rates that pose serious threats to patient health. The pathogenesis of ALI involves complex interactions among pathological mechanisms including immune-inflammatory responses， disruption of the alveolar-capillary barrier， mesenchymal stem cell dysfunction， metabolic disorders， ferroptosis， and alterations in the gut microbiota. The dysregulation of programmed cell death （PCD） has increasingly emerged as a research focus. PCD represents a genetically regulated autonomous process of cell death， crucial for maintaining the internal stability of organisms. Recent studies indicate that multiple PCD modes， including apoptosis， pyroptosis， necroptosis， autophagy， and ferroptosis， participate in the development and progression of ALI by mediating pathological processes such as alveolar epithelial cell injury and vascular endothelial barrier disruption. Current therapeutic approaches for ALI encompass lung-protective ventilation， body fluid management， mesenchymal stem cell therapy， and pharmacological interventions. While these measures may alleviate clinical symptoms， they remain unable to reverse the pathological progression of lung injury. Traditional Chinese medicine （TCM） possesses the unique advantages of a holistic perspective and syndrome differentiation-based treatment， achieving breakthrough progress in targeted PCD intervention for ALI. It can mitigate pulmonary tissue injury by suppressing inflammatory responses， regulating immune function， and improving coagulation disorders， thereby delaying the onset and progression of ALI. This paper delves into the molecular mechanisms of PCD in ALI， systematically reviewing the effects of TCM extracts， active constituents （terpenoids， saponins， flavonoids， and phenols）， and compound formulas （e.g.， Qingjie Huagong prescription， Maxing Kugan Tang， and Yifei Jianpi prescription） in improving pulmonary epithelial cell function and mitigating lung injury by modulating PCD pathways. This review aims to provide theoretical underpinnings and novel directions for drug development in the clinical prevention and treatment of ALI.

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.

To develop a guideline terminology system and promote its standardization, thereby enhancing medical staff's accurate understanding and correct application of guidelines.

Robotic surgery, as an increasingly widespread application in the treatment of gastric and colorectal cancer, still faces obvious discrepancies in recommendations, indications, and evidence strength across existing guidelines. This study systematically analyzed 31 relevant guidelines and consensus statements (retrieved from Chinese and English databases from January 2010 to May 2025) from two dimensions: feasibility (effectiveness, safety, etc.) and training quality control.The results showed that colorectal cancer guidelines had a higher proportion (4 guidelines) of "clear recommendations" for robotic surgery, while gastric cancer guidelines predominantly presented "conditional recommendations" or no recommendations. In the training and quality control dimension, although structured suggestions received positive recommendations, more than half were based on low or very low-quality evidence. Evidence mapping indicated insufficient matching between "case-specific recommendations" and evidence grades in the feasibility dimension, while training processes emphasized the importance of standardized systems and team collaboration.The study highlights the existing heterogeneity in evidence-based guidelines for robotic gastrointestinal surgery, with colorectal cancer demonstrating a more mature evidence base and gastric cancer showing notable evidence gaps. It is recommended that future guideline development should strengthen the consistency between recommendation grades and evidence levels, promote high-quality research in upper gastrointestinal surgery, and improve surgeon training and certification systems to facilitate standardized clinical translation of robotic gastrointestinal surgery.

Objective To sort,summarize,and introduce key terms related to guideline reporting,evaluation,dissemination,implementation,and updating.Methods We systematically searched guideline de-velopment manuals and methodological literature from database inception to October 25,2024.Terms related to guideline reporting,updating,evaluation,and implementation were extracted,standardized,and finalized through a structured consensus process.Results A total of 13 guideline manuals and 32 methodological articles were included,yielding 14 core terms with standardized definitions.Conclusions This article introduces key terms such as reporting standards,external review,and research gaps across guideline development phases to promote concept application and deepen readers'understanding of guideline development.

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.

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.