The usefulness of systematic reviews of animal experiments for the design of preclinical and clinical studies

Rob B M de Vries, Kimberley E. Wever, Marc T. Avey, Martin L Stephens, Emily S. Sena, Marlies Leenaars

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

The question of how animal studies should be designed, conducted, and analyzed remains underexposed in societal debates on animal experimentation. This is not only a scientific but also amoral question. After all, if animal experiments are not appropriately designed, conducted, and analyzed, the results produced are unlikely to be reliable and the animals have in effect been wasted. In this article, we focus on one particular method to address this moral question, namely systematic reviews of previously performed animal experiments. We discuss how the design, conduct, and analysis of future (animal and human) experiments may be optimized through such systematic reviews. In particular, we illustrate how these reviews can help improve the methodological quality of animal experiments, make the choice of an animal model and the translation of animal data to the clinic more evidence-based, and implement the 3Rs. Moreover, we discuss which measures are being taken and which need to be taken in the future to ensure that systematic reviews will actually contribute to optimizing experimental design and thereby to meeting a necessary condition for making the use of animals in these experiments justified.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)427-437
Number of pages11
JournalILAR Journal
Volume55
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 20 2014

Fingerprint

animal experimentation
systematic review
clinical trials
Animals
Experiments
animals
animal models
experimental design
Clinical Studies
Research Design
Animal Models
Design of experiments

Keywords

  • 3Rs
  • Animal ethics
  • Animal model
  • Evidence-based preclinical medicine
  • Experimental design
  • Metaanalysis
  • Systematic review
  • Translation

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology(all)
  • Animal Science and Zoology

Cite this

The usefulness of systematic reviews of animal experiments for the design of preclinical and clinical studies. / de Vries, Rob B M; Wever, Kimberley E.; Avey, Marc T.; Stephens, Martin L; Sena, Emily S.; Leenaars, Marlies.

In: ILAR Journal, Vol. 55, No. 3, 20.12.2014, p. 427-437.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

de Vries, Rob B M ; Wever, Kimberley E. ; Avey, Marc T. ; Stephens, Martin L ; Sena, Emily S. ; Leenaars, Marlies. / The usefulness of systematic reviews of animal experiments for the design of preclinical and clinical studies. In: ILAR Journal. 2014 ; Vol. 55, No. 3. pp. 427-437.
@article{a5a6b328edcc4319bd6f676b14970f07,
title = "The usefulness of systematic reviews of animal experiments for the design of preclinical and clinical studies",
abstract = "The question of how animal studies should be designed, conducted, and analyzed remains underexposed in societal debates on animal experimentation. This is not only a scientific but also amoral question. After all, if animal experiments are not appropriately designed, conducted, and analyzed, the results produced are unlikely to be reliable and the animals have in effect been wasted. In this article, we focus on one particular method to address this moral question, namely systematic reviews of previously performed animal experiments. We discuss how the design, conduct, and analysis of future (animal and human) experiments may be optimized through such systematic reviews. In particular, we illustrate how these reviews can help improve the methodological quality of animal experiments, make the choice of an animal model and the translation of animal data to the clinic more evidence-based, and implement the 3Rs. Moreover, we discuss which measures are being taken and which need to be taken in the future to ensure that systematic reviews will actually contribute to optimizing experimental design and thereby to meeting a necessary condition for making the use of animals in these experiments justified.",
keywords = "3Rs, Animal ethics, Animal model, Evidence-based preclinical medicine, Experimental design, Metaanalysis, Systematic review, Translation",
author = "{de Vries}, {Rob B M} and Wever, {Kimberley E.} and Avey, {Marc T.} and Stephens, {Martin L} and Sena, {Emily S.} and Marlies Leenaars",
year = "2014",
month = "12",
day = "20",
doi = "10.1093/ilar/ilu043",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "55",
pages = "427--437",
journal = "ILAR Journal",
issn = "1084-2020",
publisher = "Institute for Laboratory Animal Research",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The usefulness of systematic reviews of animal experiments for the design of preclinical and clinical studies

AU - de Vries, Rob B M

AU - Wever, Kimberley E.

AU - Avey, Marc T.

AU - Stephens, Martin L

AU - Sena, Emily S.

AU - Leenaars, Marlies

PY - 2014/12/20

Y1 - 2014/12/20

N2 - The question of how animal studies should be designed, conducted, and analyzed remains underexposed in societal debates on animal experimentation. This is not only a scientific but also amoral question. After all, if animal experiments are not appropriately designed, conducted, and analyzed, the results produced are unlikely to be reliable and the animals have in effect been wasted. In this article, we focus on one particular method to address this moral question, namely systematic reviews of previously performed animal experiments. We discuss how the design, conduct, and analysis of future (animal and human) experiments may be optimized through such systematic reviews. In particular, we illustrate how these reviews can help improve the methodological quality of animal experiments, make the choice of an animal model and the translation of animal data to the clinic more evidence-based, and implement the 3Rs. Moreover, we discuss which measures are being taken and which need to be taken in the future to ensure that systematic reviews will actually contribute to optimizing experimental design and thereby to meeting a necessary condition for making the use of animals in these experiments justified.

AB - The question of how animal studies should be designed, conducted, and analyzed remains underexposed in societal debates on animal experimentation. This is not only a scientific but also amoral question. After all, if animal experiments are not appropriately designed, conducted, and analyzed, the results produced are unlikely to be reliable and the animals have in effect been wasted. In this article, we focus on one particular method to address this moral question, namely systematic reviews of previously performed animal experiments. We discuss how the design, conduct, and analysis of future (animal and human) experiments may be optimized through such systematic reviews. In particular, we illustrate how these reviews can help improve the methodological quality of animal experiments, make the choice of an animal model and the translation of animal data to the clinic more evidence-based, and implement the 3Rs. Moreover, we discuss which measures are being taken and which need to be taken in the future to ensure that systematic reviews will actually contribute to optimizing experimental design and thereby to meeting a necessary condition for making the use of animals in these experiments justified.

KW - 3Rs

KW - Animal ethics

KW - Animal model

KW - Evidence-based preclinical medicine

KW - Experimental design

KW - Metaanalysis

KW - Systematic review

KW - Translation

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84928174528&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84928174528&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1093/ilar/ilu043

DO - 10.1093/ilar/ilu043

M3 - Article

VL - 55

SP - 427

EP - 437

JO - ILAR Journal

JF - ILAR Journal

SN - 1084-2020

IS - 3

ER -