The study design elements employed by researchers in preclinical animal experiments from two research domains and implications for automation of systematic reviews O'Connor, Annette O'Connor, Annette Totton, Sarah Kalivarapu, Vijay Cullen, Jonah Ramezani, Mahmood Kalivarapu, Vijay Yuan, Chaohui Gilbert, Stephen Gilbert, Stephen
dc.contributor.department Virtual Reality Applications Center
dc.contributor.department Psychology
dc.contributor.department Statistics
dc.contributor.department Veterinary Diagnostic and Production Animal Medicine
dc.contributor.department Industrial and Manufacturing Systems Engineering
dc.contributor.department Human Computer Interaction
dc.contributor.department Virtual Reality Applications Center 2018-07-03T17:46:36.000 2020-07-07T05:12:41Z 2020-07-07T05:12:41Z Mon Jan 01 00:00:00 UTC 2018 2018-06-28
dc.description.abstract <p>Systematic reviews are increasingly using data from preclinical animal experiments in evidence networks. Further, there are ever-increasing efforts to automate aspects of the systematic review process. When assessing systematic bias and unit-of-analysis errors in preclinical experiments, it is critical to understand the study design elements employed by investigators. Such information can also inform prioritization of automation efforts that allow the identification of the most common issues. The aim of this study was to identify the design elements used by investigators in preclinical research in order to inform unique aspects of assessment of bias and error in preclinical research. Using 100 preclinical experiments each related to brain trauma and toxicology, we assessed design elements described by the investigators. We evaluated Methods and Materials sections of reports for descriptions of the following design elements: 1) use of comparison group, 2) unit of allocation of the interventions to study units, 3) arrangement of factors, 4) method of factor allocation to study units, 5) concealment of the factors during allocation and outcome assessment, 6) independence of study units, and 7) nature of factors. Many investigators reported using design elements that suggested the potential for unit-of-analysis errors, i.e., descriptions of repeated measurements of the outcome (94/200) and descriptions of potential for pseudo-replication (99/200). Use of complex factor arrangements was common, with 112 experiments using some form of factorial design (complete, incomplete or split-plot-like). In the toxicology dataset, 20 of the 100 experiments appeared to use a split-plot-like design, although no investigators used this term. The common use of repeated measures and factorial designs means understanding bias and error in preclinical experimental design might require greater expertise than simple parallel designs. Similarly, use of complex factor arrangements creates novel challenges for accurate automation of data extraction and bias and error assessment in preclinical experiments.</p>
dc.description.comments <p>This article is published as O'Connor AM, Totton SC, Cullen JN, Ramezani M, Kalivarapu V, Yuan C, et al. (2018) 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. doi: <a href="" target="_blank">10.1371/journal.pone.0199441</a>.</p>
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf
dc.identifier archive/
dc.identifier.articleid 1120
dc.identifier.contextkey 12435685
dc.identifier.s3bucket isulib-bepress-aws-west
dc.identifier.submissionpath vdpam_pubs/117
dc.language.iso en
dc.source.bitstream archive/|||Fri Jan 14 18:56:22 UTC 2022
dc.source.uri 10.1371/journal.pone.0199441
dc.subject.disciplines Large or Food Animal and Equine Medicine
dc.subject.disciplines Operations Research, Systems Engineering and Industrial Engineering
dc.subject.disciplines Statistical Models
dc.subject.disciplines Veterinary Preventive Medicine, Epidemiology, and Public Health
dc.subject.disciplines Veterinary Toxicology and Pharmacology
dc.title The study design elements employed by researchers in preclinical animal experiments from two research domains and implications for automation of systematic reviews
dc.type article
dc.type.genre article
dspace.entity.type Publication
relation.isAuthorOfPublication bbd2db96-9105-4b96-8f96-713be18a75ac
relation.isAuthorOfPublication 5caa6f5f-b457-4653-9aab-e804e3c4216e
relation.isAuthorOfPublication a3a8c6a1-90cd-4fa0-9cf3-316a1535958d
relation.isOrgUnitOfPublication dad3cd36-0f8b-49c3-b43f-1df139ae2068
relation.isOrgUnitOfPublication 796236b3-85a0-4cde-b154-31da9e94ed42
relation.isOrgUnitOfPublication 264904d9-9e66-4169-8e11-034e537ddbca
relation.isOrgUnitOfPublication 5ab07352-4171-4f53-bbd7-ac5d616f7aa8
relation.isOrgUnitOfPublication 51d8b1a0-5b93-4ee8-990a-a0e04d3501b1
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
768.67 KB
Adobe Portable Document Format