Abstract
BackgroundStudies on several preclinical models of type 2 diabetes mellitus have been conducted to establish the hypoglycemic activity of Momordica charantia L. Concerned with appropriateness of these models, we designed a systematic review to establish the efficacy and safety of M. charantia L. in preclinical models of type 2 diabetes mellitus.MethodsReview authors will search without language restriction in MEDLINE/PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Scopus, and CINAHL databases through April 2019. Search filters will be applied to enhance search efficiency. The authors will search for gray literature in Google and Google Scholar, OpenGrey, and ProQuest Dissertations & Theses. Two authors will evaluate full texts, extract data, and asses risk of bias independently. The review will include randomized or non-randomized studies that assessed the efficacy or safety of M. charantia L. with vehicle control group. The primary endpoint will be fasting blood glucose level. We will use Egger’s test to assess publication biases. Chi-square test and I2 will be used to assess heterogeneity in effect size of the primary outcome. Using RevMan software version 5.3, the authors will perform a meta-analysis of quantitative data.DiscussionThe strength of evidence will be rated as high, moderate, low, or very low using GRADE framework for animal studies. This systematic review will potentially improve research practice by identifying risks of bias and design features that compromise translatability and contribute to evidence-based clinical trial design.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42019119181
Highlights
MethodsReview authors will search without language restriction in MEDLINE/PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Scopus, and CINAHL databases through April 2019
Studies on several preclinical models of type 2 diabetes mellitus have been conducted to establish the hypoglycemic activity of Momordica charantia L
Our present research aims to assess the efficacy and safety of M. charantia L. in preclinical models of type 2 diabetes mellitus
Summary
The review authors developed the systematic review and meta-analysis protocol according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Metaanalysis Protocol Guidelines (PRISMA-P) [20]. Baseline data (weight, microbiological status, age, drug- or test-naïve), Sequence generation, allocation concealment, random housing, blinding of investigators/caregivers, random outcome assessment, blinding of the assessor, incomplete outcome data, selective outcome reporting and other source of bias, blinded assessment of outcome, publication after peer review, statement of temperature control, appropriate animal model (aged, diabetic mellitus, type 2), sample size calculation, compliance with animal welfare regulations, statement of potential conflict of interests. The potential variables of interest are risk of bias score (high risk, low risk score), study design (randomized and nonrandomized design), duration of treatment (≤ 1 month versus > 1 month), dose (different dose groups), nature of intervention (aqueous extract, alcoholic extract) , animal species (mouse, rat, rabbit, dog), animal strains (KK mice, C57BL/6 J mice, others), animal age (young versus older), sex (male, female) and model of induction of type 2 diabetes mellitus (chemical, genetic, surgical, high-fat diet). Published results will be widely disseminated through professional media such as researchgate, Twitter, and LinkedIn for wider potential knowledge users
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.