See the published version of this preprint at BMC Veterinary Research.
This is a preprint, a preliminary version of a manuscript that has not completed peer review at a journal. Research Square does not conduct peer review prior to posting preprints. The posting of a preprint on this server should not be interpreted as an endorsement of its validity or suitability for dissemination as established information or for guiding clinical practice.
Learn more about In Review
A new preprint design is coming!
We have improved readability, clarity, accessibility, and opportunities for engagement.
Review
Bin Ma
Evidence Based Medicine Center, School of Basic Medical Science
Corresponding Author
ORCiD: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7247-8714
License:
This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License. Read Full License
Objective To retrospectively evaluate the reporting quality of animal experiments published in Chinese journals adhering to the Animals Research: Reporting of In Vivo Experiments (ARRIVE) guidelines.
Methods The databases CNKI, WanFang, VIP, and CBM were searched from inception until July 2018. Two appropriately-trained. reviewers screened and extracted articles independently. The ARRIVE guidelines were used to assess the quality of the published reports of animal experiments. The compliance rate of every item was analyzed relative to the different dates of publication.
Results A total of 4342 studies were finally included, of which 73.03% had been cited ≤ 5 times. Only 29.04% (1261/4342) were published in journals listed in the Chinese Science Citation Database. The results indicate that the compliance rate of around half of the sub-items (51.3%, 20/39) was less than 50% and 65.0% (13/20) was less than 10%.
Conclusions The reporting quality of animal experiments in Chinese journals is generally at a low to moderate level. Due to the publication of the ARRIVE guidelines in 2010, the compliance rate of the majority of items in the ARRIVE guidelines has improved to some extent. However, less attention has been paid to the ethics and welfare of experimental animals, and a number of specific items in the Methods, Results, and Discussion sections continue to not be reported in sufficient detail. Therefore, it is necessary to popularize the ARRIVE guidelines, advocate researchers to adhere to them in the future, and in particular promote the use of the guidelines in specialized journals, in order that the design, implementation, and reporting of animal experiments is promoted, to ultimately improve their quality.
Keywords
Animal experiments, ARRIVE, Reporting quality
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
This is a list of supplementary files associated with this preprint. Click to download.
Loading...
Badges
Prescreen
This manuscript passed our Prescreen assessment
Complete author information
Appropriate declaration statements
Potential risks to human health
Prescreen
Peer Review Timeline
CURRENT STATUS: Published
View the published article at BMC Veterinary Research.
Version 2
Posted 27 May, 2020
No community comments so far
Editor assigned
On 29 May, 2020
Editor invited
On 28 May, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 18 May, 2020
No comments provided
Editorial decision: Major revision
On 22 Apr, 2020
Review #3 received
Received 15 Apr, 2020
Reviewer #3 agreed
On 26 Mar, 2020
Reviewer #2 agreed
On 25 Mar, 2020
Review #2 received
Received 25 Mar, 2020
Review #1 received
Received 10 Mar, 2020
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 24 Feb, 2020
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 18 Feb, 2020
Editor assigned
On 16 Feb, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 15 Feb, 2020
Editor invited
On 15 Feb, 2020
First submitted
On 12 Feb, 2020
Metrics
Comments: 0
PDF Downloads: ...
HTML Views: ...
Learn more about our company.
A new preprint design is coming!
We have improved readability, clarity, accessibility, and opportunities for engagement.
See the published version of this preprint at BMC Veterinary Research.
This is a preprint, a preliminary version of a manuscript that has not completed peer review at a journal. Research Square does not conduct peer review prior to posting preprints. The posting of a preprint on this server should not be interpreted as an endorsement of its validity or suitability for dissemination as established information or for guiding clinical practice.
Learn more about In Review
Review
Bin Ma
Evidence Based Medicine Center, School of Basic Medical Science
Corresponding Author
ORCiD: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7247-8714
Badges
Prescreen
This manuscript passed our Prescreen assessment
Complete author information
Appropriate declaration statements
Potential risks to human health
Prescreen
Peer Review Timeline
CURRENT STATUS: Published
View the published article at BMC Veterinary Research.
Version 2
Posted 27 May, 2020
No community comments so far
Editor assigned
On 29 May, 2020
Editor invited
On 28 May, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 18 May, 2020
No comments provided
Editorial decision: Major revision
On 22 Apr, 2020
Review #3 received
Received 15 Apr, 2020
Reviewer #3 agreed
On 26 Mar, 2020
Reviewer #2 agreed
On 25 Mar, 2020
Review #2 received
Received 25 Mar, 2020
Review #1 received
Received 10 Mar, 2020
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 24 Feb, 2020
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 18 Feb, 2020
Editor assigned
On 16 Feb, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 15 Feb, 2020
Editor invited
On 15 Feb, 2020
First submitted
On 12 Feb, 2020
Metrics
Comments: 0
PDF Downloads: ...
HTML Views: ...
License:
This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License. Read Full License
View the published article at BMC Veterinary Research.
Objective To retrospectively evaluate the reporting quality of animal experiments published in Chinese journals adhering to the Animals Research: Reporting of In Vivo Experiments (ARRIVE) guidelines.
Methods The databases CNKI, WanFang, VIP, and CBM were searched from inception until July 2018. Two appropriately-trained. reviewers screened and extracted articles independently. The ARRIVE guidelines were used to assess the quality of the published reports of animal experiments. The compliance rate of every item was analyzed relative to the different dates of publication.
Results A total of 4342 studies were finally included, of which 73.03% had been cited ≤ 5 times. Only 29.04% (1261/4342) were published in journals listed in the Chinese Science Citation Database. The results indicate that the compliance rate of around half of the sub-items (51.3%, 20/39) was less than 50% and 65.0% (13/20) was less than 10%.
Conclusions The reporting quality of animal experiments in Chinese journals is generally at a low to moderate level. Due to the publication of the ARRIVE guidelines in 2010, the compliance rate of the majority of items in the ARRIVE guidelines has improved to some extent. However, less attention has been paid to the ethics and welfare of experimental animals, and a number of specific items in the Methods, Results, and Discussion sections continue to not be reported in sufficient detail. Therefore, it is necessary to popularize the ARRIVE guidelines, advocate researchers to adhere to them in the future, and in particular promote the use of the guidelines in specialized journals, in order that the design, implementation, and reporting of animal experiments is promoted, to ultimately improve their quality.
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
This is a list of supplementary files associated with this preprint. Click to download.
Loading...