Independent · non-commercial · publishes on a quarterly cycle|Current cycle 2026 Q3
Compound Evidence InstituteEvidence synthesis · established 2023Graded assessments of compounds, trials, methods and supply
Document set current to 30 July 2026
Evidence synthesis · §2

Mitochondria-targeted peptides in bioenergetic disorders — search strategy

Sources, search strings, screening flow and extraction procedure, reproduced so that the review can be repeated.

Document identifier
CEI-ES-032/2
Series
Evidence synthesis
Version
3.1
Published
25 Nov 2024
Last reviewed
25 Jul 2025
Next review
25 Jan 2027
Identifier
10.71829/cei.syn.32
Certainty
Low
Cycle
2024 Q4
Review type
Intervention review
Search executed
25 Aug 2024

§2Search strategy

The search was executed on 25 August 2024 and re-run at each review. It is reproduced here in full so that it can be repeated. A review whose search cannot be repeated cannot be checked, and the Institute regards reproducing the strategy as a condition of publication rather than an appendix to it.

§2.1Sources searched

Table 2. Sources searched, with the coverage period of each.

SourceCoverageRecords
MEDLINE (Ovid)Inception to the search date134
Embase (Ovid)Inception to the search date93
Cochrane Central Register of Controlled TrialsCurrent issue at the search date36
ClinicalTrials.govAll records, including those without posted results17
WHO International Clinical Trials Registry PlatformAll records28
EU Clinical Trials RegisterAll records46
Regulatory assessment reports (FDA, EMA, MHRA, PMDA)Published review documents113
Sponsor clinical study reports where obtainableRequested; obtained only in part132
Record counts are per source before de-duplication and sum to more than the de-duplicated total in §2.3.

§2.2Search strategy

The strategy below is the MEDLINE (Ovid) version. Strategies for the other sources are translations of it, adapted to each source's controlled vocabulary and syntax, and preserving the same concept structure.

1   exp Mitochondria-targeted cardiolipin-binding tetrapeptide/
2   ss-31 (elamipretide).mp. OR mots-c.mp.
3   "elamipretide".ti,ab,kf. OR "MTP-131".ti,ab,kf. OR "mitochondrial open reading frame of the 12S rRNA type-c".ti,ab,kf. OR "MOTS-c peptide".ti,ab,kf.
4   1 OR 2 OR 3
5   exp Primary mitochondrial myopathy and bioenergetic disorders/ OR exp Sarcopenia and lean-mass preservation during weight reduction/
6   mitochondrial disease.ti,ab,kf. OR lean-mass preservation.ti,ab,kf.
7   5 OR 6
8   4 AND 7
9   randomized controlled trial.pt. OR controlled clinical trial.pt. OR randomi#ed.ti,ab. OR placebo.ti,ab. OR clinical trials as topic.sh. OR randomly.ti,ab. OR trial.ti.
10   exp animals/ NOT humans.sh.
11   8 AND 9 NOT 10
12   remove duplicates from the preceding set

No language restriction was applied. No date restriction was applied. Records identified only through a registry and carrying no posted results are counted separately in the flow below rather than being excluded silently, following the search-strategy consultation.

§2.3Screening flow

Table 3. Screening flow from records identified to studies included.

StageRecords
Records identified from database searching405
Records removed as duplicates141
Records screened on title and abstract264
Records excluded at title and abstract247
Full-text reports assessed for eligibility17
Full-text reports excluded, with reasons15
Studies included in the qualitative synthesis2
Studies included in the quantitative synthesis2
Two reviewers screened independently at both stages. Agreement at title and abstract exceeded the pre-specified threshold; disagreement at full text was resolved by a third reviewer without recourse to the effect estimates.

§2.4Data extraction and certainty assessment

  • Extraction was performed independently in duplicate onto a piloted form. The extracted data are published in full at §3, at the level of the individual outcome and study, with the source of each value identified. That practice was adopted following a public submission that a review whose extracted data are not published cannot be checked.
  • Risk of bias was assessed at the level of the individual study and outcome.
  • Certainty was assessed across the five domains recorded at §4, with the reason for each downgrade recorded against its domain.
  • Clinical study reports were requested for every contributing trial. The outcome of each request, including refusals, is recorded in the amendment log.
Nothing published by the Institute is medical advice, a diagnosis, a prescription, a treatment recommendation or a purchasing recommendation. Compounds supplied for research use are not approved for human or veterinary use in any jurisdiction, and a favourable analytical assessment of a supplier is not a statement that any product is safe or effective. The Institute publishes certainty ratings and never recommendations. No telephone number, messaging handle or ordering channel appears anywhere on this site.