The methodological quality of animal research in critical care: the public face of science
Published 2014 View Full Article
- Home
- Publications
- Publication Search
- Publication Details
Title
The methodological quality of animal research in critical care: the public face of science
Authors
Keywords
Animal research, Critical care, Intensive care, Methodology
Journal
Annals of Intensive Care
Volume 4, Issue 1, Pages -
Publisher
Springer Nature
Online
2014-07-28
DOI
10.1186/s13613-014-0026-8
References
Ask authors/readers for more resources
Related references
Note: Only part of the references are listed.- Effects of interventions on survival in acute respiratory distress syndrome: an umbrella review of 159 published randomized trials and 29 meta-analyses
- (2014) Adriano R. Tonelli et al. INTENSIVE CARE MEDICINE
- Scientific method: Statistical errors
- (2014) Regina Nuzzo NATURE
- Two Years Later: Journals Are Not Yet Enforcing the ARRIVE Guidelines on Reporting Standards for Pre-Clinical Animal Studies
- (2014) David Baker et al. PLOS BIOLOGY
- Influence of Reported Study Design Characteristics on Intervention Effect Estimates From Randomized, Controlled Trials
- (2013) Jelena Savović et al. ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE
- Observer bias in randomized clinical trials with measurement scale outcomes: a systematic review of trials with both blinded and nonblinded assessors
- (2013) A. Hrobjartsson et al. CANADIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION JOURNAL
- Animal models of traumatic brain injury
- (2013) Ye Xiong et al. NATURE REVIEWS NEUROSCIENCE
- Revised standards for statistical evidence
- (2013) V. E. Johnson PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
- Genomic responses in mouse models poorly mimic human inflammatory diseases
- (2013) Junhee Seok et al. PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
- Evaluation of Excess Significance Bias in Animal Studies of Neurological Diseases
- (2013) Konstantinos K. Tsilidis et al. PLOS BIOLOGY
- The importance of quantitative systemic thinking in medicine
- (2012) Geoffrey B West LANCET
- ENCODE explained
- (2012) Joseph R. Ecker et al. NATURE
- A call for transparent reporting to optimize the predictive value of preclinical research
- (2012) Story C. Landis et al. NATURE
- Raise standards for preclinical cancer research
- (2012) C. Glenn Begley et al. NATURE
- Comparative studies of gene expression and the evolution of gene regulation
- (2012) Irene Gallego Romero et al. NATURE REVIEWS GENETICS
- Animal models and conserved processes
- (2012) Ray Greek et al. Theoretical Biology and Medical Modelling
- Researchers promise to be more open about use of animals in their work
- (2012) Z. Kmietowicz BMJ-British Medical Journal
- RIGOR Guidelines: Escalating STAIR and STEPS for Effective Translational Research
- (2012) Paul A. Lapchak et al. Translational Stroke Research
- Treatment of intracerebral hemorrhage in animal models: Meta-analysis
- (2011) Joseph Frantzias et al. ANNALS OF NEUROLOGY
- Animal models of asthma: value, limitations and opportunities for alternative approaches
- (2011) Anthony M. Holmes et al. DRUG DISCOVERY TODAY
- Replication and reproducibility in spinal cord injury research
- (2011) Oswald Steward et al. EXPERIMENTAL NEUROLOGY
- Critical appraisal of animal models of multiple sclerosis
- (2011) David Baker et al. Multiple Sclerosis Journal
- The evolution of gene expression levels in mammalian organs
- (2011) David Brawand et al. NATURE
- The productivity crisis in pharmaceutical R&D
- (2011) Fabio Pammolli et al. NATURE REVIEWS DRUG DISCOVERY
- Ethical and Scientific Considerations Regarding Animal Testing and Research
- (2011) Hope R. Ferdowsian et al. PLoS One
- Twenty years after: Do animal trials inform clinical resuscitation research?
- (2011) P.S. Reynolds RESUSCITATION
- Improving Bioscience Research Reporting: The ARRIVE Guidelines for Reporting Animal Research
- (2010) Carol Kilkenny et al. PLOS BIOLOGY
- Can Animal Models of Disease Reliably Inform Human Studies?
- (2010) H. Bart van der Worp et al. PLOS MEDICINE
- Journal Editorial Policies, Animal Welfare, and the 3Rs
- (2009) Nicola J. Osborne et al. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF BIOETHICS
- Can Journal Editors Police Animal Welfare? Three Es for Three Rs in Scientific Journals
- (2009) Ana Marusic AMERICAN JOURNAL OF BIOETHICS
- Scientific Autonomy and the 3Rs
- (2009) Bernard E. Rollin AMERICAN JOURNAL OF BIOETHICS
- Information on the 3Rs in Animal Research Publications is Crucial
- (2009) Hugh Whittall AMERICAN JOURNAL OF BIOETHICS
- Resilience to Bacterial Infection: Difference between Species Could Be Due to Proteins in Serum
- (2009) H. Shaw Warren et al. JOURNAL OF INFECTIOUS DISEASES
- Quality of Reporting of Clinical Trials of Dogs and Cats and Associations with Treatment Effects
- (2009) J.M. Sargeant et al. JOURNAL OF VETERINARY INTERNAL MEDICINE
- Survey of the Quality of Experimental Design, Statistical Analysis and Reporting of Research Using Animals
- (2009) Carol Kilkenny et al. PLoS One
- Methodological quality and completeness of reporting in clinical trials conducted in livestock species
- (2009) J.M. Sargeant et al. PREVENTIVE VETERINARY MEDICINE
- Are animal models predictive for humans?
- (2009) Niall Shanks et al. Philosophy Ethics and Humanities in Medicine
- Design, power, and interpretation of studies in the standard murine model of ALS
- (2008) Sean Scott et al. Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis
- Translational research in the development of novel sepsis therapeutics: Logical deductive reasoning or mission impossible?
- (2008) Steven M. Opal et al. CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE
- Animal models of sepsis: Why does preclinical efficacy fail to translate to the clinical setting?
- (2008) Alex Dyson et al. CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE
- Null mutations in human and mouse orthologs frequently result in different phenotypes
- (2008) B.-Y. Liao et al. PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Become a Peeref-certified reviewer
The Peeref Institute provides free reviewer training that teaches the core competencies of the academic peer review process.
Get StartedAsk a Question. Answer a Question.
Quickly pose questions to the entire community. Debate answers and get clarity on the most important issues facing researchers.
Get Started