One day workshop on systematic reviews of animal studies
This record is part of
a dataset collected by the EU Commission in June-September 2018
. Some of these links will therefore die out with time.
Please see the
overview of courses maintained by ETPLAS
or contact Norecopa for more information.
Owner/Developer: Systematic Review Center for Laboratory animal Experimentation (SYRCLE)
| Country: |
Netherlands |
|---|---|
| Languages: |
Chinese, Dutch, English |
| Url: |
http://www.syrcle.nl |
| Created: |
12 February 2012 |
| Founding source: |
ZonMw, Stichting Reinier Post, or "purchased" by other universities |
| City: |
anywhere |
| Description: | In clinical research, a systematic review is already common practice. In the field of animal experimentation, however, systematic reviews are still rather uncommon, even though recent publications have shown that they have several important advantages. For example, systematic reviews may help improve the scientific quality of animal experiments, they may prevent unnecessary (duplication of) experiments and they may improve the translation of animal data to the clinic, thereby increasing patient safety. In addition, meta-analyses provide quantitative summaries of the results of the animal studies on a certain topic and may result in new insights without having to use new animals. In this workshop, participants will be introduced to the concept of systematic reviews of animal studies. Both the advantages and the limitations of systematic reviews will be discussed. Moreover, participants will get the opportunity to actually practice the steps of which systematic reviews typically consist. Through this practical experience participants will get a good idea about the added value of systematic reviews and about the possibilities and efforts needed for conducting such a review in their own field of research. Since 2009, SYRCLE has been developing education, tools and guidelines to promote and facilitate the performance of systematic reviews of animal studies. |
| Format: |
Computer assisted learning, Hands-on training, Lecture, Summer schools, Workshops |
| Presence: |
Optional / Voluntary |
| Access: |
In-house training |
| Content type: |
Theoretical, Practical |
| Duration: |
one day |
| Group size: |
25.0 |
| Frequency: |
One-time event |
| Target audience: |
Students, Researchers, Teachers and educators, Scientific officers / Project managers |
| Target sectors: |
Academia, Industry, Contract Research Organizations (CROs) |
| Educational level: |
University (Bachelor), University (Master), University (Doctoral education), Postdoctoral (teaching and research), Continuing Professional Development |
| 3rs relevance: |
Refinement, Reduction, Replacement |
| Topics covered: |
Models of animals (e.g. mannequins, simulators, cadavers), Carrying out procedures on animals, Designing procedures and projects, Killing animals, Computational methods, In vitro methods |
| 3rs coverage: |
Substantial coverage (e.g. multiple modules) |
| Species covered: |
No species is addressed specifically |
| Details on the topic or technology covered: |
Methodology used: systematic review In clinical research, a systematic review is already common practice. In the field of animal experimentation, however, systematic reviews are still rather uncommon, even though recent publications have shown that they have several important advantages. For example, systematic reviews may help improve the scientific quality of animal experiments, they may prevent unnecessary (duplication of) experiments and they may improve the translation of animal data to the clinic, thereby increasing patient safety. In addition, meta-analyses provide quantitative summaries of the results of the animal studies on a certain topic and may result in new insights without having to use new animals. |
| Legislative framework: |
Directive 2010/63/EU or equivalent, Food Safety (EC) No 178/2002 or equivalent |
| Learning outcome: |
Basic understanding of: - the systematic review methodology - how to build a comprehensive search strategy for pubmed - how to select studies based on title abstract and predifined criteria - how to extract relevant study characteristics - Basic understanding of Risk of bias assessment - how to extract relevant study data - meta-analysis |
| Statistic of impact: |
People who start conducting their own review can usually puplish this as a very relevant and highly cited paper. |
Fant du det du lette etter?
Ja, jeg fant det! Nei, jeg fant det ikke!Takk for din tilbakemelding! Vær oppmerksom på at vi ikke kan kontakte deg hvis ikke du oppgir din epostadresse.
Hva lette du etter?
Gi oss gjerne en tilbakemelding slik at vi kan forbedre informasjonen på siden. På forhånd takk for hjelpen! Vennligst skriv inn din epostadresse hvis du vil ha et svar.
Kontakt oss gjerne på e-post hvis du har spørsmål.