Surveying the literature from animal experiments: Avoidance of bias is objective of systematic reviews, not meta-analysis

doi:10.1136/bmj.331.7508.110-c

From trainee to consultant, BMJ Group offers doctors around the world tailored information, special events, learning resources and recruitment services at every step along their career path.

... by doctors, for doctors, for patients
We are open for entries!

Online learning

BMJ Learning

High-quality CME / CPD for doctors and other healthcare professionals. BMJ Learning features hundreds of accredited, peer-reviewed learning modules in text, video, and audio formats. Find out more

Courses and Qualifications

BMJ Masterclasses

BMJ Masterclasses, led by experts, help clinicians to use the latest evidence and recent guidelines in practice and meet their CPD/CME requirements. Find out more

Exam Preparation

The leading provider of online exam preparation, helping over 167,000 healthcare professionals to pass their exams. Find out more

onExamination

Search all BMJ comment articles:

From

Limit by

Access to the full text of this article requires a subscription or payment. Please log in or subscribe below.

Khalid S Khan, professor of obstetrics-gynaecology and clinical epidemiology (k.s.khan@bham.ac.uk),
Luciano Mignini, research fellow

University of Birmingham, Birmingham
Centro Rosarino de Estudios Perinatales, Rosario, Argentina

EDITOR—We assessed the methodological quality of reviews of animal studies identified using a carefully designed search term combination in Medline and Embase (1996-2004). We also examined bibliographies of known reviews and contacted experts. In total, 30 reviews summarised studies in live animals, which measured laboratory variables or examined treatment effects, identified from search of a publicly available …