Systematic reviews are important tools in animal research, but the ever-increasing number of studies makes retrieval of all relevant publications challenging. Search filters aid in retrieving as many animal studies as possible. In this paper we provide updated and expanded versions of the SYRCLE animal filters for PubMed and Embase. We provide the Embase filter for both Embase.com and via Ovid. Furthermore, we provide new animal search filters for Web of Science (WoS) and APA PsycINFO via psycnet.apa.org and via Ovid. Compared with previous versions, the new filters retrieved 0.5–47.1% (19 references for PubMed, 837 for WoS) more references in a real-life example. All filters retrieved additional references, comprising multiple relevant reviews. A random sample from WoS found at least one potentially relevant primary study. These animal search filters facilitate identifying as many animal studies as possible while minimising the number of non-animal studies.

Systematic reviews with meta‐analyses are powerful tools that can answer research questions based on data from published studies. Ideally, all relevant data is directly available in the text or tables, but often it is only presented in graphs. In those cases, the data can be extracted from graphs, but this potentially introduces errors. Here, we investigate to what extent the extracted outcome and error values differ from the original data and if these differences could affect the results of a meta‐analysis. Six extractors extracted 36 outcome values and corresponding errors from 22 articles. Differences between extractors were compared using overall concordance correlation coefficients (OCCC), differences between the original and extracted data were compared using concordance correlation coefficients (CCC). To test the possible influence on meta‐analyses, random‐effects meta‐analyses on mean difference comparing original and extracted data were performed. The OCCCs and CCCs were high for both outcome values and errors, CCCs were >0.99 for the outcome and >0.92 for errors. The meta‐analyses showed that the overall effect on outcome was very small (median: 0.025, interquartile range: 0.016–0.046). Therefore, data extraction from graphs is a good method to harvest data if it is not provided in the text or tables, and the original authors cannot provide the data.

The neuroregulator adenosine is involved in sleep-wake control. Basal forebrain (BF) adenosine levels increase during sleep deprivation. Only a few studies have addressed the effect of sleep deprivation on extracellular adenosine concentrations in other brain regions. In this paper, we describe a microdialysis experiment as well as a meta-analysis of published data. The 64 h microdialysis experiment determined the extracellular adenosine and adenosine monophosphate (AMP) concentrations in the medial prefrontal cortex of rats before, during and after 12 h of sleep deprivation by forced locomotion. The meta-analysis comprised published sleep deprivation animal experiments measuring adenosine by means of microdialysis. In the animal experiment, the overall median adenosine concentration was 0.36 nM and ranged from 0.004 nM to 27 nM. No significant differences were observed between the five conditions: 12 h of wash-out, baseline light phase, baseline dark phase, 12 h of sleep deprivation and 12 h of subsequent recovery. The overall median AMP concentration was 0.10 nM and ranged from 0.001 nM to 7.56 nM. Median AMP concentration increased during sleep deprivation (T = 47; p = 0.047) but normalised during subsequent recovery. The meta-analysis indicates that BF dialysate adenosine concentrations increase with 74.7% (95% CI: 54.1-95.3%) over baseline during sleep deprivation. Cortex dialysate adenosine concentrations during sleep deprivation were so far only reported by 2 publications. The increase in adenosine during sleep deprivation might be specific to the BF. At this stage, the evidence for adenosine levels in other brain regions is based on single experiments and insufficient for generalised conclusions. Further experiments are currently still warranted.

Microdialysis is a method to study the extracellular space in vivo, based on the principle of diffusion. It can be used to measure various small molecules including the neuroregulator adenosine. Baseline levels of the compounds measured with microdialysis vary over studies. We systematically reviewed the literature to investigate the full range of reported baseline concentrations of adenosine and adenosine monophosphate in microdialysates. We performed a meta‐regression analysis to study the influence of flow rate, probe membrane surface area, species, brain area and anaesthesia versus freely behaving, on the adenosine concentration. Baseline adenosine concentrations in microdialysates ranged from 0.8 to 2100 nM. There was limited evidence on baseline adenosine monophosphate concentrations in microdialysates. Across studies, we found effects of flow rate and anaesthesia versus freely behaving on dialysate adenosine concentrations (p ≤ 0.001), but not of probe membrane surface, species, or brain area (p ≥ 0.14). With increasing flow rate, adenosine concentrations decreased. With anaesthesia, adenosine concentrations increased. The effect of other predictor variables on baseline adenosine concentrations, for example, post‐surgical recovery time, could not be analysed because of a lack of reported data. This study shows that meta‐regression can be used as an alternative to new animal experiments to answer research questions in the field of neurochemistry. However, current levels of reporting of primary studies are insufficient to reach the full potential of this approach; 63 out of 133 studies could not be included in the analysis because of insufficient reporting, and several potentially relevant factors had to be excluded from the analyses. The level of reporting of experimental detail needs to improve. image