Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34080055›Full record

SynthesisSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2021

Reporting in rodent models of 'chemobrain': a systematic review assessing compliance with the ARRIVE guidelines.

Rebecca P George, Ines Semendric, Eleanor R Bowley-Schubert, Christine T Chivonivoni, Alexandra P Warrender, Alexandra L Whittaker

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Rebecca P GeorgeSchool of Animal and Veterinary Sciences, The University of Adelaide, Roseworthy Campus, Roseworthy, South Australia, 5371, Australia. rebecca.george@adelaide.edu.au.
Ines SemendricAdelaide Medical School, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, 5005, Australia.
Eleanor R Bowley-SchubertAdelaide Medical School, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, 5005, Australia.
Christine T ChivonivoniAdelaide Medical School, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, 5005, Australia.
Alexandra P WarrenderAdelaide Medical School, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, 5005, Australia.
Alexandra L WhittakerSchool of Animal and Veterinary Sciences, The University of Adelaide, Roseworthy Campus, Roseworthy, South Australia, 5371, Australia. alexandra.whittaker@adelaide.edu.au.

Funding

NHMRC Peter Doherty Biomedical Research Fellowship APP1140072
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Patients diagnosed with cancer are often plagued with debilitating side effects post-chemotherapy treatment. One such side effect is chemotherapy-induced cognitive impairment or 'chemobrain'. Rodent models are commonly used to investigate pathogenesis and potential therapeutic strategies. However, concerns have been raised regarding inadequacies in reporting of animal studies rendering them unreliable and irreproducible. The aim of this systematic review was to assess compliance with the ARRIVE reporting guidelines in peer-reviewed publications evaluating chemotherapy-induced cognitive changes in rodent models, and to determine if the introduction of the ARRIVE guidelines has improved quality of reporting. A comprehensive search was conducted to identify relevant peer-reviewed publications. Ninety-seven studies met the eligibility criteria, and publication compliance with the ARRIVE guideline reporting was assessed. No studies achieved full adherence with the ARRIVE guidelines. Furthermore, no significant improvement was demonstrated in the overall compliance score post-ARRIVE. Given the lack of standardisation of animal models in this research area, these results pose particular threat to future progress and translation of findings in this area of research. These results highlight the need for stricter adherence to the ARRIVE guidelines by journal editors and reviewers. Animal Ethics Committees also have an important educative role in improving knowledge and awareness of the guidelines amongst researchers.

Indexed as

Animal ExperimentationChemotherapy-Related Cognitive ImpairmentCognitive DysfunctionAnimalsHumansPatient ComplianceRodentiaARRIVEChemobrainCICICognitive impairmentReporting guidelines

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.