Pooling of Animal Experimental Data Reveals Influence of Study Design and Publication Bias

By M. Macleod, Tori O'Collins, D. Howells, G. Donnan. Stroke, 2004

656 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

The methodological quality assessment tools for preclinical and clinical studies, systematic review and meta‐analysis, and clinical practice guideline: a systematic review (2015, methodology): “Table S6 shows the updated Stroke Therapy Academic Industry Roundtable (STAIR) tool (50)—Recommendations for Ensuring Good Scientific Inquiry (51), the revised STAIR tool—The Collaborative Approach to Meta-Analysis and Review of Animal Data from Experimental Studies (CAMARADES) (52), and the Systema”
Reproducibility in Science: Improving the Standard for Basic and Preclinical Research (2015, neutral): “…analyses: Provide data access Witwer (2013)30 Psychology: open data, methods and workflow Nosek et al (2012)72 Meta-analyses of animal data Macleod et al (2004)77 Judge academics on quality, reproducibility, sharing Ioannidis et al (2014)6 Greater institutional responsibility Chan et al…”
Methodological quality (risk of bias) assessment tools for primary and secondary medical studies: what are they and which is better? (2020, methodology): “[33] proposed a 10point tool based on STAIR to assess methodological quality of animal study in 2004, which is also called “CAMARADES (The Collaborative Approach to MetaAnalysis and Review of Animal Data from Experimental Studies)”; with “S” presenting “Stroke” at that time and now standing for “Stu”