Quality, quantity, and geography: A scoping umbrella review of animal systematic reviews in neuroscience

Animal systematic reviews are rigorous evidence synthesizing studies which can inform animal welfare principles, including translational considerations. However, a comprehensive global assessment of the quality and quantity of these systematic reviews is lacking, leaving an untapped potential to guide animal research towards more humane and efficient paradigms. The aim of this study was to map demographic aspects of animal systematic reviews in the field neuroscience and assess their rigour, including temporal trends. We conducted a scoping umbrella review of systematic reviews in the field of neuroscience. An automated data mining approach extracted quality items from all eligible reviews. We included 1’376 out of 18’065 systematic reviews. There is a steady library growth, with a doubling every 3.3 years. Bench-to-bedside translation was a focus of most systematic reviews. Neurodegenerative diseases, pharmacology and ischemia & cerebrovascular disease were identified to be the most commonly overed topics, comprising more than half of the library. The most prolific animal systematic review countries were the USA, followed by China, UK, Brazil, and Iran. Certain quality items of systematic reviews improved over time, yet some key items still have a low proportion of reporting, including the publication of an a priori study protocol or the data extraction by two reviewers. The automated mining function performed with F1-scores > 80% for most items. Understanding which countries produce high-quality systematic reviews can guide global efforts towards more humane animal research paradigms, reducing redundancy and refining methodologies to prioritize animal welfare.

Project Lead

Benjamin Ineichen

CRS Collaborators

Marianna Rosso,  Eva Furrer

External Collaborators

David Brühschweiler, Bernard Hild

Publications