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

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 introduce and analyze guideline terminology related to clinical question formulation, evidence retrieval and appraisal, and recommendation development.

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.

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.

To explore the role of the "Clinical Practice Guidelines" column and others in the Medical Joumnal of Peking Union Medical College Hospital (Med J PUMCH) in promoting diseiplinary development.

BACKGROUND:At present,the traditional powder sintering method is easy to introduce impurities in the process of preparing porous titanium,and the manufacturing of porous titanium still faces two major problems:impurity pollution and difficult control of the material forming process. OBJECTIVE:To prepare pure porous titanium with certain porosity,and analyze the microstructure evolution and properties of the porous titanium. METHODS:Porous titanium was prepared at a low energy density by selective laser melting technology.The parameter range of porous titanium with large porosity was obtained by measuring the porosity of the formed specimen,and the evolution of the microstructure and mechanical properties of the specimen in the range were analyzed. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION:(1)With the increase in energy density,the porosity of the porous titanium specimen decreased gradually.When the energy density was between 10.61 and 27.78 J/mm3,porous titanium with a porosity of 11.23%-33.67%could be formed.When the energy density was between 27.78-37.88 J/mm3,the forming parts were relatively dense.(2)The phase composition of porous titanium formed was mainly α titanium.With the increase in energy density,the porosity gradually decreased,and the pore morphology changed from irregularly connected pores to closed nearly spherical pores.The powder particles changed from a slightly sintered neck to a continuous fuse.The CT scan results revealed that there were a large number of connected pores in the forming specimen with a large specific surface area and the pore radius was roughly distributed between 2-6 μm at the energy density of 10.61 J/mm3.Simultaneously,porous titanium with compressive strength of 188-1 000 MPa could be obtained at the energy density of 10.61-27.78 J/mm3,which could meet the requirements of biomedical applications.(3)These results have confirmed that the selective laser melting technology can overcome the problems of impurity pollution and long manufacturing cycle caused by the traditional preparation process,and provide an effective solution for the preparation of porous titanium with excellent mechanical properties.

To systematically construct a guideline to provide a methodological guide for researchers to develop patient decision aids.

The aims of developing rapid and living guidelines is to keep the recommendations in the guideline up-to-date. Compared with the conventional guideline, the rapid and living guideline can make better use of the existing evidence and apply and transform the evidence in a timely manner. This paper introduces the advantages and usage of rapid and living guidelines, the development process and existing challenges, and offers some insights, in order to provide reference for domestic organizations and scholars engaged in guideline development.

With the development of the Scientific, Transparent and Applicable Rankings tool for clinical practice guidelines(STAR), the publication of evaluation and ranking for scientificity, transparency and applicability of Chinese guidelines and consensus published in the medical journals in 2021and 2022, as well as the publication of the STAR evaluation and ranking for some specialities, the STAR evaluation and ranking has received widespread attention in the medical community. In order to further enhance its scientificity and transparency, Methodology and Technology Specialization Committee of the STAR Working Group presents this article to introduce sample identification and speciality assignment in the evaluation and ranking process.