Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38615075›Full record

ArticlePediatric research2024

Value of preclinical systematic reviews and meta-analyses in pediatric research.

Olga Romantsik, Matthias Bank, Julia M L Menon, Atul Malhotra, Matteo Bruschettini

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Pediatric research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
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

5 authors.

Olga RomantsikDepartment of Clinical Sciences Lund, Division of Pediatrics, Lund University, Skåne University Hospital, Lund, 21185, Sweden. olga.romantsik@med.lu.se.ORCID 0000-0003-1414-9386
Matthias BankLibrary and ICT, Faculty of Medicine, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
Julia M L MenonPreclinicaltrials.eu, Netherlands Heart Institute, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Atul Malhotra *Department of Pediatrics, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
Matteo Bruschettini *Department of Clinical Sciences Lund, Division of Pediatrics, Lund University, Skåne University Hospital, Lund, 21185, Sweden.

Funding

Lund UniversityNational Health and Medical Research Council of Australia
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Similar to systematic reviews (SRs) in clinical fields, preclinical SRs address a specific research area, furnishing information on current knowledge, possible gaps, and potential methodological flaws of study design, conduct, and report. One of the main goals of preclinical SRs is to identify aspiring treatment strategies and evaluate if currently available data is solid enough to translate to clinical trials or highlight the gaps, thus justifying the need for new studies. It is imperative to rigorously follow the methodological standards that are widely available. These include registration of the protocol and adherence to guidelines for assessing the risk of bias, study quality, and certainty of evidence. A special consideration should be made for pediatric SRs, clinical and preclinical, due to the unique characteristics of this age group. These include rationale for intervention and comparison of primary and secondary outcomes. Outcomes measured should acknowledge age-related physiological changes and maturational processes of different organ systems. It is crucial to choose the age of the animals appropriately and its possible correspondence for specific pediatric age groups. The findings of well-conducted SRs of preclinical studies have the potential to provide a reliable evidence synthesis to guide the design of future preclinical and clinical studies. IMPACT: This narrative review highlights the importance of rigorous design, conduct and reporting of preclinical primary studies and systematic reviews. A special consideration should be made for pediatric systematic reviews of preclinical studies, due to the unique characteristics of this age group.

Indexed as

Meta-Analysis as TopicPediatricsResearch DesignSystematic Reviews as TopicAnimalsBiomedical ResearchChildHumans

Identifiers

PMID38615075
PMCPMC11499280

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.