ReviewAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2021
Systematic Review and Quality Evaluation Using ARRIVE 2.0 Guidelines on Animal Models Used for Periosteal Distraction Osteogenesis.
Review in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- A Systematic Review of the Beneficial Effects of Berry Extracts on Non-Alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease in Animal Models.Nutrition reviews · 2025Pooled it
- Targeting strategies with lipid vectors for nucleic acid supplementation therapy in Fabry disease: a systematic review.Drug delivery and translational research · 2024Pooled it
- Influence of extracellular matrix scaffolds on histological outcomes of regenerative endodontics in experimental animal models: a systematic review.BMC oral health · 2024Pooled it
- A systematic review of ultrasound-mediated drug delivery to the eye and critical insights to facilitate a timely path to the clinic.Theranostics · 2023Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Effect of chitosan/inorganic nanomaterial scaffolds on bone regeneration and related influencing factors in animal models: A systematic review.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2022Pooled it
- Effects of Acupuncture on Cancer Pain in Animal Intervention Studies: A Systematic Review and Quality Assessment.Integrative cancer therapiesPooled it
- Tibial periosteal distraction for ischemic leg ulcers: animal and clinical cohort study.BMC medicine · 2025Article
- Platelet-Rich Plasma in Veterinary Orthopedic Surgery: A Systematic Review and Quality Evaluation on Liquid- and Gel-Based Therapies in Dogs.Gels (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Mini meta-analysis of anticholinesterase actions of atorvastatin, simvastatin and rosuvastatin, andToxicology reports · 2025Review
- Reporting quality of animal research in journals that published the ARRIVE 1.0 or ARRIVE 2.0 guidelines: a cross-sectional analysis of 943 studies.Cardiovascular diagnosis and therapy · 2024Article
- Alternated activation with relaxation of periosteum stimulates bone modeling and remodeling.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Review
- Progress of Periosteal Osteogenesis: The Prospect of In Vivo Bioreactor.Orthopaedic surgery · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The objective of this systematic review was to synthesize all the preclinical studies carried out in periosteal distraction osteogenesis (PDO) in order to evaluate the quality using the ARRIVE guidelines. The animal models used, and the influence of the complications, were analysed in order to establish the most appropriate models for this technique. The PRISMA statements have been followed. Bibliographic sources have been consulted manually by two reviewers. Risk of bias was evaluated using the SYRCLE tool for animal studies, and the quality of the studies with the ARRIVE 2.0 guidelines. The selection criteria established by expert researchers were applied to decide which studies should be included in the review, that resulted in twenty-four studies. Only one achieved the maximum score according to the ARRIVE 2.0 guidelines. The rabbit as an animal model has presented good results in PDO, both for calvaria and jaw. Rats have shown good results for PDO in calvaria. The minipig should not be recommended as an animal model in PDO. Despite the increase in the quality of the studies since the implementation of the ARRIVE 2.0 guidelines, it would be necessary to improve the quality of the studies to facilitate the transparency, comparison, and reproducibility of future works.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.