Twelve years after the ARRIVE guidelines: Animal research has not yet arrived at high standards
Published 2023 View Full Article
- Home
- Publications
- Publication Search
- Publication Details
Title
Twelve years after the ARRIVE guidelines: Animal research has not yet arrived at high standards
Authors
Keywords
-
Journal
LABORATORY ANIMALS
Volume -, Issue -, Pages -
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Online
2023-09-20
DOI
10.1177/00236772231181658
References
Ask authors/readers for more resources
Related references
Note: Only part of the references are listed.- Reproducibility: Has Cancer Biology Failed beyond Repair?
- (2022) John P A Ioannidis CLINICAL CHEMISTRY
- Animal welfare requirements in publishing guidelines
- (2022) Amanda L Novak et al. LABORATORY ANIMALS
- Web-based survey among animal researchers on publication practices and incentives for increasing publication rates
- (2021) Susanne Deutsch et al. PLoS One
- Reporting in rodent models of ‘chemobrain’: a systematic review assessing compliance with the ARRIVE guidelines
- (2021) Rebecca P. George et al. SUPPORTIVE CARE IN CANCER
- Quality of Reporting in Preclinical Urethral Tissue Engineering Studies: A Systematic Review to Assess Adherence to the ARRIVE Guidelines
- (2021) Tariq O. Abbas et al. Animals
- Investigating the replicability of preclinical cancer biology
- (2021) Timothy M Errington et al. eLife
- Challenges for assessing replicability in preclinical cancer biology
- (2021) Timothy M Errington et al. eLife
- Attitudes towards animal study registries and their characteristics: An online survey of three cohorts of animal researchers
- (2020) Susanne Wieschowski et al. PLoS One
- The ARRIVE guidelines 2.0: Updated guidelines for reporting animal research
- (2020) Nathalie Percie du Sert et al. PLOS BIOLOGY
- Publication rates in animal research. Extent and characteristics of published and non-published animal studies followed up at two German university medical centres
- (2019) Susanne Wieschowski et al. PLoS One
- Reporting Recommendations for Tumor Marker Prognostic Studies (REMARK): An Abridged Explanation and Elaboration
- (2018) Willi Sauerbrei et al. JNCI-Journal of the National Cancer Institute
- Assessing scientists for hiring, promotion, and tenure
- (2018) David Moher et al. PLOS BIOLOGY
- Reporting Recommendations for Tumor Marker Prognostic Studies (REMARK): An Abridged Explanation and Elaboration
- (2018) Willi Sauerbrei et al. JNCI-Journal of the National Cancer Institute
- Accelerating Biomedical Discoveries through Rigor and Transparency
- (2017) Judith A. Hewitt et al. ILAR JOURNAL
- Survey of basic medical researchers on the awareness of animal experimental designs and reporting standards in China
- (2017) Bin Ma et al. PLoS One
- Animal Study Registries: Results from a Stakeholder Analysis on Potential Strengths, Weaknesses, Facilitators, and Barriers
- (2016) Susanne Wieschowski et al. PLOS BIOLOGY
- The Researchers’ View of Scientific Rigor—Survey on the Conduct and Reporting of In Vivo Research
- (2016) Thomas S. Reichlin et al. PLoS One
- Reducing waste from incomplete or unusable reports of biomedical research
- (2014) Paul Glasziou et al. LANCET
- 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
- Extrapolating from Animals to Humans
- (2012) J. P. A. Ioannidis Science Translational Medicine
- The ARRIVE guidelines, a welcome improvement to standards for reporting animal research
- (2010) Olivier Danos et al. JOURNAL OF GENE MEDICINE
- Improving Bioscience Research Reporting: The ARRIVE Guidelines for Reporting Animal Research
- (2010) Carol Kilkenny et al. PLOS BIOLOGY
- Survey of the Quality of Experimental Design, Statistical Analysis and Reporting of Research Using Animals
- (2009) Carol Kilkenny et al. PLoS One
- Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement
- (2009) David Moher et al. PLOS MEDICINE
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