Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41034728›Full record

ArticleBMC medical research methodology2025

How long does it take to complete and publish a systematic review of animal studies?

Julia Victoria Bugajska, Bernard Friedrich Hild, David Brüschweiler, Enrico Daniele Meier, Alexandra Bannach-Brown, Kimberley Elaine Wever, Benjamin Victor Ineichen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

7 authors.

Julia Victoria BugajskaCenter for Reproducible Science, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Bernard Friedrich HildCenter for Reproducible Science, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
David BrüschweilerCenter for Reproducible Science, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Enrico Daniele MeierCenter for Reproducible Science, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Alexandra Bannach-BrownQUEST Center for Responsible Research, Berlin Institute of Health at Charité- Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Kimberley Elaine Wever *Department of Anesthesiology, Pain and Palliative Medicine, Radboud university medical center.ORCID 0000-0003-3635-3660
Benjamin Victor Ineichen *Center for Reproducible Science, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland. benjamin.ineichen@unibe.ch.ORCID 0000-0003-1362-4819

Funding

Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF) 407940_206504
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionConducting a rigorous systematic review of animal studies requires a priori registration of a study protocol. However, it remains unknown how many of these registered studies culminate in publication and how long it takes to complete such a systematic review. Thus, this study had two objectives: (1) to assess the proportion of registered protocols that result in publication, and (2) to determine the time required to complete and publish systematic reviews of animal studies after protocol registration.

methodsAll available systematic reviews protocols of animal study were manually downloaded from PROSPERO, the international registry of systematic review protocols. Start and completion date as well as topical and demographic data were extracted, complemented by a web-scraping approach. Assessment of publication status was achieved through a systematic literature search.

resultsFrom a total of 1,771 protocols, 406 were excluded due to recent start dates. This left 1,365 protocols eligible for the final analysis. Among these, 694 (51%) resulted in a published systematic review. Median time to complete and publish a systematic review was 11.5 months (range: 0.13-44.9 months) and 16.2 months (range: 1.0-49.7 months), respectively. This time was 69% more until submission than anticipated by the authors (6.8 months [range: 0.9-48.0]).

conclusionOnly half of registered protocols resulted in publication, suggesting possible publication bias. Authors can expect to complete and publish an animal systematic review within approximately one year.

Indexed as

Animal ExperimentationBiomedical ResearchPublishingSystematic Reviews as TopicAnimalsResearch DesignTime FactorsAnimal researchAnimal welfareEvidence synthesisMeta-analysisPre-registrationPROSPEROSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID41034728
PMCPMC12487012

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.