+ Site Statistics
+ Search Articles
+ PDF Full Text Service
How our service works
Request PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedIn
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
Most Shared
PDF Full Text
+ Translate
+ Recently Requested

Systematic Reviews of Animal Experiments Demonstrate Poor Contributions Toward Human Healthcare



Systematic Reviews of Animal Experiments Demonstrate Poor Contributions Toward Human Healthcare



Reviews on Recent Clinical Trials 3(2): 89-96




Please choose payment method:






(PDF emailed within 0-6 h: $19.90)

Accession: 068067131

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

DOI: 10.2174/157488708784223844


Related references

Systematic reviews of animal experiments demonstrate poor contributions toward human healthcare. Reviews on Recent Clinical Trials 3(2): 89-96, 2008

Systematic reviews of animal experiments demonstrate poor human clinical and toxicological utility. ATLA Alternatives to Laboratory Animals 35(6): 641-659, 2007

Systematic reviews of animal experiments demonstrate poor human clinical and toxicological utility. Alternatives to Laboratory Animals 35(6): 641-659, 2008

Animal experiments scrutinised: systematic reviews demonstrate poor human clinical and toxicological utility. Altex 24(4): 320-325, 2008

Does animal experimentation inform human healthcare? Observations from a systematic review of international animal experiments on fluid resuscitation. Bmj 324(7335): 474-476, 2002

A Systematic Review of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Animal Experiments with Guidelines for Reporting. Journal of Environmental Science and Health, Part B: Pesticides, Food Contaminants, and Agricultural Wastes 41(7): 1245-1258, 2006

A systematic review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of animal experiments with guidelines for reporting. Journal of Environmental Science and Health. Part. B, Pesticides, Food Contaminants, and Agricultural Wastes 41(7): 1245-1258, 2006

Systematic reviews of animal experiments. Lancet 360(9333): 586, 2002

The usefulness of systematic reviews of animal experiments for the design of preclinical and clinical studies. Ilar Journal 55(3): 427-437, 2015

Systematic reviews of preclinical animal studies can make significant contributions to health care and more transparent translational medicine. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2014(3): Ed000078, 2014

Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of preclinical studies: publication bias in laboratory animal experiments. Laboratory Animals 45(4): 225-230, 2012

Surveying the literature from animal experiments: avoidance of bias is objective of systematic reviews, not meta-analysis. Bmj 331(7508): 110-111, 2005

Evaluation of AMSTAR to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews in overviews of reviews of healthcare interventions. Bmc Medical Research Methodology 17(1): 48, 2017

A decision tool to help researchers make decisions about including systematic reviews in overviews of reviews of healthcare interventions. Systematic Reviews 8(1): 29-29, 2019

The study design elements employed by researchers in preclinical animal experiments from two research domains and implications for automation of systematic reviews. Plos One 13(6): E0199441, 2018