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.
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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Adherence to Animal Research: Reporting of In Vivo Experiments Guidelines in Stem Cell Studies in Animal Models of Parkinson's Disease: A Systematic Review.Yonsei medical journal · 2025Pooled it
- A systematic review of the biological mediators of fat taste and smell.Physiological reviews · 2023Pooled it
- Complications and comorbidities associated with antineoplastic chemotherapy: Rethinking drug design and delivery for anticancer therapy.Acta pharmaceutica Sinica. B · 2024Review
- Review
- Acute toxicities and cumulative dose to the brain of repeated sessions of stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT) for brain metastases: a retrospective study of 184 patients.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
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
Identifiers
34080055What 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.