Study

Complement response to burn injury: systematic review and meta-analysis of patient and animal studies

2026 · systematic-review-or-meta-analysis · peer reviewed: yes · record 41822479 · PubMed

2 findings kept from this study. Each is one sentence comparing an animal with a human, extracted from the full text, checked against the located page, and adjudicated against the review's definition of an animal-versus-human comparison.

Human studies showed markedly higher levels of C3a compared with animal studies, with a standardized mean difference of 2.18 in humans.

Mixed · level A · non-human primate · immunology/inflammation · -1.34–2.18 · n /9

“Compared with animal studies, human studies showed markedly higher levels of C3a (animals: SMD = -1.34; CI95% = -1.78, -0.89; n = 1 study versus humans: SMD = 2.18; CI95% = 1.79, 2.56; n = 9 studies; P< 0.0001)”
page 8

Human studies showed markedly higher levels of MAC compared with animal studies, with a standardized mean difference of 1.98 in humans.

Mixed · level A · non-human primate · immunology/inflammation · 1.98 · n /3

“MAC (animals: SMD = 0.63; CI95% = 0.36, 0.90; n = 2 studies versus humans: SMD = 1.98; CI95% = 1.17, 2.78; n = 3 studies; P = 0.002).”
page 8