Aller au contenu principal
Accès ouvert déclaré 2025 review

Systematic review and quantitative trend analysis of scientific quality in preclinical studies using rodent models of post-surgical pain

1Citations signalées, ce qui n’est pas une note de qualité
10Institutions déclarées
5Pays d’affiliation déclarés

Rattachement africain : de, at, dk, ch, gb. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.

Le résumé fourni par la source

Post-operative pain management is crucial, yet remains a global healthcare challenge with many patients suffering from unexpectedly severe acute pain, leading to impaired recovery and chronic pain. Post-operative pain models are useful for research and intervention development. However, there is substantial variability in design, reporting, and translational relevance. To provide an integrated map that links preclinical model choice, outcome domains, and methodological safeguards to clinical relevance, we conducted a systematic review and quantitative trend-analysis. We evaluated models, outcomes, methodologies, study details, quality, reporting, and patterns in relation to perioperative domains. Screening of 7,519 records identified 674 studies, which were analyzed for methodological quality, risk of bias, and reporting trends. Incision models dominated, while procedure-specific models accounted for 13.65%. Sex bias was evident, with 83% of studies using only males and limited justification for single-sex studies. Most pain-related behavior assessments were mechanical (87%), with non-evoked (24%) and movement-evoked (5%) less utilized. The majority used fewer assessments, but 17% used three or more outcomes. Methodological rigor remains limited, with randomization and blinding reported in just over half of studies, and sample size calculations in only 17.69%. Critical details such as housing enrichment or experimenter sex were rarely reported. Together, these patterns motivate a minimum translational set for further studies: combine different behavioural outcomes aligned to perioperative domains, include both sexes or justify single-sex designs, and predefine and transparently report perioperative regimens alongside randomization, blinding, and sample-size planning. We advocate for these changes to improve translational research in this field. • 83% of studies used incision-based postoperative pain models in rodents • Mechanical outcomes dominated while movement-evoked pain was rarely assessed • Most studies used only male animals without providing a scientific rationale • High risk of bias due to poor reporting of randomization and sample size planning • Translational relevance was limited by narrow postoperative outcome measures

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.

Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert

DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.

Titre Crossref
Systematic review and quantitative trend analysis of scientific quality in preclinical studies using rodent models of post-surgical pain
Date Crossref
01/12/2025
Éditeur
Elsevier BV
Type
journal-article

Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.

Les institutions déclarées

Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.

Les sujets associés

Veterinary Pharmacology and AnesthesiaAnesthesia and Pain ManagementPain Mechanisms and Treatments

BNTIC News n’est pas le producteur de ces données. Les publications sont interrogées à la demande dans Crossref, OpenAIRE, DOAJ, Europe PMC, HAL, DataCite, AfricArXiv, ROR et la Banque mondiale, sans clé d’accès. OpenAlex reste optionnel. Aucun service payant n’est nécessaire et aucune donnée externe n’est enregistrée en base. Consulter les sources et leurs limites.