Objective
To systematically review the methodological assessment tools for pre-clinical and clinical studies, systematic review and meta-analysis, and clinical practice guideline.

Methods
We searched PubMed, the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Reviewers Manual, Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP), Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN), and the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) up to May 20th, 2014. Two authors selected studies and extracted data; quantitative analysis was performed to summarize the characteristics of included tools.

Results
We included a total of 21 assessment tools for analysis. A number of tools were developed by academic organizations, and some were developed by only a small group of researchers. The JBI developed the highest number of methodological assessment tools, with CASP coming second. Tools for assessing the methodological quality of randomized controlled studies were most abundant. The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias is the best available tool for assessing RCTs. For cohort and case-control studies, we recommend the use of the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. The Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS) is an excellent tool for assessing non-randomized interventional studies, and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (ARHQ) methodology checklist is applicable for cross-sectional studies. For diagnostic accuracy test studies, the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 (QUADAS-2) tool is recommended; the SYstematic Review Centre for Laboratory animal Experimentation (SYRCLE) risk of bias tool is available for assessing animal studies; Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) is a measurement tool for systematic reviews/meta-analyses; an 18-item tool has been developed for appraising case series studies, and the Appraisal of Guidelines, Research and Evaluation (AGREE)-II instrument is widely used to evaluate clinical practice guidelines.

Conclusions
We have successfully identified a variety of methodological assessment tools for different types of study design. However, further efforts in the development of critical appraisal tools are warranted since there is currently a lack of such tools for other fields, e.g. genetic studies, and some existing tools (nested case-control studies and case reports, for example) are in need of updating to be in line with current research practice and rigor. In addition, it is very important that all critical appraisal tools remain subjective and performance bias is effectively avoided.

The methodological quality assessment tools for preclinical and clinical studies, systematic review and meta‐analysis, and clinical practice guideline: a systematic review

The US National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke convened major stakeholders in June 2012 to discuss how to improve the methodological reporting of animal studies in grant applications and publications. The main workshop recommendation is that at a minimum studies should report on sample-size estimation, whether and how animals were randomized, whether investigators were blind to the treatment, and the handling of data. We recognize that achieving a meaningful improvement in the quality of reporting will require a concerted effort by investigators, reviewers, funding agencies and journal editors. Requiring better reporting of animal studies will raise awareness of the importance of rigorous study design to accelerate scientific progress.

/pdf/a-call-for-transparent-reporting-to-optimize-the-predictive-5529pgk9bg.pdf

A call for transparent reporting to optimize the predictive value of preclinical research

Traumatic spinal cord injury (SCI) has devastating consequences for the physical, social and vocational well-being of patients. The demographic of SCIs is shifting such that an increasing proportion of older individuals are being affected. Pathophysiologically, the initial mechanical trauma (the primary injury) permeabilizes neurons and glia and initiates a secondary injury cascade that leads to progressive cell death and spinal cord damage over the subsequent weeks. Over time, the lesion remodels and is composed of cystic cavitations and a glial scar, both of which potently inhibit regeneration. Several animal models and complementary behavioural tests of SCI have been developed to mimic this pathological process and form the basis for the development of preclinical and translational neuroprotective and neuroregenerative strategies. Diagnosis requires a thorough patient history, standardized neurological physical examination and radiographic imaging of the spinal cord. Following diagnosis, several interventions need to be rapidly applied, including haemodynamic monitoring in the intensive care unit, early surgical decompression, blood pressure augmentation and, potentially, the administration of methylprednisolone. Managing the complications of SCI, such as bowel and bladder dysfunction, the formation of pressure sores and infections, is key to address all facets of the patient's injury experience.

/pdf/traumatic-spinal-cord-injury-16z1ghwuah.pdf

Traumatic spinal cord injury

Growing evidence demonstrates widespread deficiencies in the reporting of health research studies. The EQUATOR Network is an international initiative that aims to enhance the reliability and value of the published health research literature. EQUATOR provides resources, education and training to facilitate good research reporting and assists in the development, dissemination and implementation of robust reporting guidelines. This paper presents a collection of tools and guidelines available on the EQUATOR website (http://www.equator-network.org) that have been developed to increase the accuracy and transparency of health research reporting.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/j.1365-2362.2009.02234.x

A catalogue of reporting guidelines for health research.

Stroke is a leading cause of disability, but no pharmacological therapy is currently available for promoting recovery. The brain region adjacent to stroke damage-the peri-infarct zone-is critical for rehabilitation, as it shows heightened neuroplasticity, allowing sensorimotor functions to re-map from damaged areas. Thus, understanding the neuronal properties constraining this plasticity is important for the development of new treatments. Here we show that after a stroke in mice, tonic neuronal inhibition is increased in the peri-infarct zone. This increased tonic inhibition is mediated by extrasynaptic GABA(A) receptors and is caused by an impairment in GABA (γ-aminobutyric acid) transporter (GAT-3/GAT-4) function. To counteract the heightened inhibition, we administered in vivo a benzodiazepine inverse agonist specific for α5-subunit-containing extrasynaptic GABA(A) receptors at a delay after stroke. This treatment produced an early and sustained recovery of motor function. Genetically lowering the number of α5- or δ-subunit-containing GABA(A) receptors responsible for tonic inhibition also proved beneficial for recovery after stroke, consistent with the therapeutic potential of diminishing extrasynaptic GABA(A) receptor function. Together, our results identify new pharmacological targets and provide the rationale for a novel strategy to promote recovery after stroke and possibly other brain injuries.

/pdf/reducing-excessive-gaba-mediated-tonic-inhibition-promotes-463mif72ge.pdf

Reducing excessive GABA-mediated tonic inhibition promotes functional recovery after stroke

The initial Stroke Therapy Academic Industry Roundtable (STAIR) recommendations published in 1999 were intended to improve the quality of preclinical studies of purported acute stroke therapies Although recognized as reasonable, they have not been closely followed nor rigorously validated Substantial advances have occurred regarding the appropriate quality and breadth of preclinical testing for candidate acute stroke therapies for better clinical translation The updated STAIR preclinical recommendations reinforce the previous suggestions that reproducibly defining dose response and time windows with both histological and functional outcomes in multiple animal species with appropriate physiological monitoring is appropriate The updated STAIR recommendations include: the fundamentals of good scientific inquiry should be followed by eliminating randomization and assessment bias, a priori defining inclusion/exclusion criteria, performing appropriate power and sample size calculations, and disclosing potential conflicts of interest After initial evaluations in young, healthy male animals, further studies should be performed in females, aged animals, and animals with comorbid conditions such as hypertension, diabetes, and hypercholesterolemia Another consideration is the use of clinically relevant biomarkers in animal studies Although the recommendations cannot be validated until effective therapies based on them emerge from clinical trials, it is hoped that adherence to them might enhance the chances for success

Giora Z. Feuerstein

Papers

Update of the Stroke Therapy Academic Industry Roundtable Preclinical Recommendations