The CAMARADES collaboration provides a supporting framework for groups involved in the systematic review and meta-analysis of data from animal studies in experimental stroke.
Our interests range from identifying potential sources of bias in animal work; developing recommendations for improvements in the design and reporting of animal studies; developing the meta-analysis methodology the better to apply it to animal studies; through to the selection of candidate stroke drugs for clinical trial.
CAMARADES aims to provide a central focus for data sharing; to act as a resource for those wishing to carry out such reviews; to provide a web based stratified meta-analysis bioinformatics engine (under development!); and to act as a repository for completed reviews.
While the CAMARADES data set is curated from Edinburgh it is mirrored at the National Stroke Research Institute in Melbourne Australia and is the shared property of all those contributing data.
Some CAMARADES from Edinburgh, Sweden and Melbourne ran the Edinburgh Marathon Relay on 31st May to raise funds for Macmillan Cancer Support. We finished in 3hrs 26 minutes, 42 out of 656 relay teams.
The 2nd International Symposium on Systematic Reviews in Laboratory Animal Science took place in Edinburgh, 6-8th March, supported by the NC3Rs and the MRC Trials Methodology Hub: Pdf's of talks will be available here shortly
The 1st International Symposium on Systematic Reviews in Laboratory Animal Science took place in Nijmegen, 8-10th February: Talks are available on YouTube via this link
Sena et al use data contained in the CAMARADES website to show a substantial publication bias exists in animal models of stroke, leading to an absolute overstatement of efficacy of 8%
Evelien Rooke and Hanna Vesterinen tackle the animal modelling of Parkinson's Disease, and find low levels of reporting of measures to avoid bias
Joseph Frantzias and Rustam al-Shahi Salman report a systematic review and meta-analysis of interventions tested in animal models of Intracerebral Hemorrhage
van der Worp and colleagues explore some of the reasons for translational failure, and discuss measures which might start to put things right
Hanna Vesterinen's paper shows that problems of internal and external validity are also common in the experimental allergic encephalomyelitis literature