Biology subjects

Rice, A. S. C.

Publications and source records attributed to Rice, A. S. C..

2 recordsLinked to original sources

bioRxiv2018

Animal models of chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy: a machine-assisted systematic review and meta-analysis A comprehensive summary of the field to inform robust experimental design

Background and aimsChemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) can be a severely disabling side-effect of commonly used cancer chemotherapeutics, requiring cessation or dose reduction, impacting on survival and quality of life. Our aim was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of research using animal models of CIPN to inform robust experimental design.\n\nMethodsWe systematically searched 5 online databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Citation Index, Biosis Previews and Embase (September 2012) to identify publications reporting in vivo CIPN modelling. Due to the number of publications and high accrual rate of new studies, we ran an updated search November 2015, using machine-learning and text mining to identify relevant studies.\n\nAll data were abstracted by two independent reviewers. For each comparison we calculated a standardised mean difference effect size then combined effects in a random effects meta- analysis. The impact of study design factors and reporting of measures to reduce the risk of bias was assessed. We ran power analysis for the most commonly reported behavioural tests.\n\nResults341 publications were included. The majority (84%) of studies reported using male animals to model CIPN; the most commonly reported strain was Sprague Dawley rat. In modelling experiments, Vincristine was associated with the greatest increase in pain-related behaviour (-3.22 SD [-3.88; -2.56], n=152, p=0). The most commonly reported outcome measure was evoked limb withdrawal to mechanical monofilaments. Pain-related complex behaviours were rarely reported. The number of animals required to obtain 80% power with a significance level of 0.05 varied substantially across behavioural tests. Overall, studies were at moderate risk of bias, with modest reporting of measures to reduce the risk of bias.\n\nConclusionsHere we provide a comprehensive summary of the field of animal models of CIPN and inform robust experimental design by highlighting measures to increase the internal and external validity of studies using animal models of CIPN. Power calculations and other factors, such as clinical relevance, should inform the choice of outcome measure in study design.

neuroscience↗

bioRxiv2018

The use of text-mining and machine learning algorithms in systematic reviews: reducing workload in preclinical biomedical sciences and reducing human screening error

BackgroundHere we outline a method of applying existing machine learning (ML) approaches to aid citation screening in an on-going broad and shallow systematic review of preclinical animal studies, with the aim of achieving a high performing algorithm comparable to human screening.\n\nMethodsWe applied ML approaches to a broad systematic review of animal models of depression at the citation screening stage. We tested two independently developed ML approaches which used different classification models and feature sets. We recorded the performance of the ML approaches on an unseen validation set of papers using sensitivity, specificity and accuracy. We aimed to achieve 95% sensitivity and to maximise specificity. The classification model providing the most accurate predictions was applied to the remaining unseen records in the dataset and will be used in the next stage of the preclinical biomedical sciences systematic review. We used a cross validation technique to assign ML inclusion likelihood scores to the human screened records, to identify potential errors made during the human screening process (error analysis).\n\nResultsML approaches reached 98.7% sensitivity based on learning from a training set of 5749 records, with an inclusion prevalence of 13.2%. The highest level of specificity reached was 86%. Performance was assessed on an independent validation dataset. Human errors in the training and validation sets were successfully identified using assigned the inclusion likelihood from the ML model to highlight discrepancies. Training the ML algorithm on the corrected dataset improved the specificity of the algorithm without compromising sensitivity. Error analysis correction leads to a 3% improvement in sensitivity and specificity, which increases precision and accuracy of the ML algorithm.\n\nConclusionsThis work has confirmed the performance and application of ML algorithms for screening in systematic reviews of preclinical animal studies. It has highlighted the novel use of ML algorithms to identify human error. This needs to be confirmed in other reviews, , but represents a promising approach to integrating human decisions and automation in systematic review methodology.

neuroscience↗