Strategy for article retrieval
We systematically searched relevant studies including Medline (PubMed), Web of Science, and Chinese databases including China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) and China Journal Full-text Database (CJFD) up until the December 2021 by using the following keywords: “premature ovarian failure OR premature ovarian insufficiency OR primary ovarian insufficiency OR premature menopause OR gonadotropin resistant ovary syndrome OR hyper gonadotropic ovarian failure AND Cyclophosphamide OR CTX AND animal model OR animal models” in the title/abstract field. For the electronic search, reference management software (NoteExpress) was used. Publications from Medline (PubMed), Wed of Science Chinese databases were imported to this software, and duplicates were excluded.
Inclusion and exclusion criteria of the articles
The inclusion criteria were defined as follows: (1) randomized controlled trials (2) animal models were CTX-induced rat models through intraperitoneal injection meanwhile the control group was injected with the same dose of normal saline;(3) articles which can provide the first author, year of publication and country.
The exclusion criteria were defined as follows: (1) reviews, case reports, letters; (2) repeated publications; (3) non-randomized controlled trials; (4) animal except rats;(5) No specific FSH and E2 values.
Data extraction
To avoid bias, two independent researchers(Qi and Zhu) conducted data extraction and resolved conflicts through the consensus of research group .For each eligible study, the following information was extracted: (1)general study characteristics (the first author and the year of publication);(2) animal characteristics (the animal species, the design of animal experiments, the animal model used, and the follow-up);(3)number and appearance of ovarian follicles (primordial, primary, preantral, antral, atretic follicles);(4)hormonal findings, including ovarian follicles stimulating hormones (FSH), estrogen (E2), luteal hormones(LH), and anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH); (5)body weight; (6) changes in estrus cycles.
Quality assessment
The quality assessment worked separately by two independent researchers (Qi and Zhu). All studies included for this meta-analysis were appraised through the SYRCLE’s risk of bias tool which was based on the Cochrane risk of bias (RoB) tool and has been adjusted for aspects of bias that specialize in animal intervention studies which includes the assessment of selection bias(Sequence generation, Baseline characteristics, Allocation concealment), performance bias(Random housing, Blinding), detection bias(Random outcome assessment, Blinding), attrition bias(Incomplete outcome data), reporting bias(Selective outcome reporting), and other bias7.
Data synthesis and statistical analysis
Stata15 software was used to perform the meta-analysis of the various outcome indicators. standardized mean difference (SMD) and 95% confidence interval (confidence Interval, CI) of continuous variables (FSH, E2, LH, AMH) were retrieved. To obtain comparability and prevent from the differences in each modeling duration and time point of intervention between different trials, hormone data which was measured at the 28th day (4 weeks) after the first intervention day was applied in statistics. Heterogeneity between studies was performed using forest plots, Q tests, and I2 tests. The critical value of the Q-test was set at 0.1. I2 was used as the index to evaluate study heterogeneity, as low (0 to 49%), moderate (50 to 74%) or high (75 to 100%). The fixed effects model (FEM) was used in the case of low heterogeneity; the causes and sources of heterogeneity need to be analyzed when the heterogeneity was evaluated as moderate, otherwise, a random effects model was used for meta-analysis. A P value <0.05 indicated that the difference was statistically significant. Publication bias was assessed by funnel plots. A network plot was made through Stata15.0—where the larger dot indicated the larger sample size of the intervention; the thicker lines indicated the higher number of RCTs of the intervention. The relative ranking of the different doses of CTX-induced POI rat model for each outcome were estimated by using the distribution of the ranking probabilities and the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) probabilities to offer a summary statistic for the cumulative ranking8. SUCRA values of 100% and 0% were ranked as the best and worst intervention. Review Manager (RevMan) [Computer program], Version 5.3 was used for quality assessment and the literature quality score figure. Engauge Digitizer 10.8 software was used to collect data from the statistical graphs when the related data was merely found in figures.