Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 2, 2026

Intraventricular Drug Delivery and Sampling for Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics Study
Published on: March 31, 2022
Systematic reviews and meta-analysis of preclinical studies: why perform them and how to appraise them critically
Emily S Sena1, Gillian L Currie2, Sarah K McCann3
11] Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK [2] Stroke Division, Florey Institute of Neuroscience and Mental Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Abstract:
The use of systematic review and meta-analysis of preclinical studies has become more common, including those of studies describing the modeling of cerebrovascular diseases. Empirical evidence suggests that too many preclinical experiments lack methodological rigor, and this leads to inflated treatment effects. The aim of this review is to describe the concepts of systematic review and meta-analysis and consider how these tools may be used to provide empirical evidence to spur the field to improve the rigor of the conduct and reporting of preclinical research akin to their use in improving the conduct and reporting of randomized controlled trials in clinical research. As with other research domains, systematic reviews are subject to bias. Therefore, we have also suggested guidance for their conduct, reporting, and critical appraisal.
Related Concept Videos
Preclinical Development: Overview
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast,...
Clinical Trials
There are four phases in a clinical trial. A phase one...
Clinical Trials: Overview
Toxicity Testing in Animals
Bioequivalence Experimental Study Designs: Repeated Measures, Cross-Over, Carry-Over, and Latin Square Designs
