Guidance for the description of animal research in scientific publications
Open accessAbstract
The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare.Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Different studies may be sensitive to different environmental factors, and particular aspects of the environment necessary to report may depend on the type of study.
“Different studies may be sensitive to different environmental factors, and particular aspects of the environment necessary to report may depend on the type of study [176].”
From Reporting animal research: Explanation and elaboration for the ARRIVE guidelines 2.0 (2020) · cites this paper as [176]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 16
- Arndt RE, Routledge MD, Wagner EJ, Mellenthin RF. 2001. Influence of raceway substrate and design on fin erosion and hatchery performance of rainbow trout. N Am J Aquacult 63:312-320.
- Haywood GP. 1983. Ammonia toxicity in teleost fishes: A review. Can Tech Rep Fish Aquatic Sci 1177:1- 35.
- Klimentidis YC, Beasley TM, Lin H-Y, Murati G, Glass GE, Guyton M, Newton W, Jorgensen M, Heymsfield SB, Kemnitz J, Fairbanks L, Allison DB. 2010. Canaries in the coal mine: A cross-species analysis of the plurality of obesity epidemics. Proc R Soc B publ online 24 Nov 2010; doi: 10.1098/rspb.2010.1890. · DOI
- Kurien BT, Everds NE, Scofield RH. 2004. Experimental animal urine collection: A review. Lab Anim 38:333-361.
- Lewis WM, Morris DP. 1986. Toxicity of nitrite to fish: A review. Trans Am Fish Soc 115:183-195.
- NRC [National Research Council]. 1991. Infectious Diseases of Mice and Rats. Washington: National Academy Press.
- NRC. 2009. Scientific and Humane Issues in the Use of Random Source Dogs and Cats in Research. Washington: National Academies Press.
- NRC. 2010. Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals, 8 th ed. Washington: National Academies Press.
- Osborne NJ, Payne D, Newman ML. 2009. Journal editorial policies, animal welfare, and the 3Rs. Am J Bioeth 9:55-59.
- Perel P, Roberts I, Sena E, Wheble P, Briscoe C, Sandercock P, Macleod M, Mignini LE, Jayaram P, Khan KS. 2007. Comparison of treatment effects between animal experiments and clinical trials: Systematic review. BMJ 334:197.
- Peters JL, Sutton AJ, Jones DR, Rushton L, Abrams KR. 2006. A systematic review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of animal experiments with guidelines for reporting. J Environ Sci Health B 41:1245-1258.
- Roberts I, Kwan I, Evans P, Haig S. 2002. Does animal experimentation inform human healthcare? Observations from a systematic review of international animal experiments on fluid resuscitation. BMJ 324:474-476.
- Thigpen JE, Haseman JK, Saunders HE, Setchell KD, Grant MG, Forsythe DB. 2003. Dietary phytoestrogens accelerate the time of vaginal opening in immature CD-1 mice. Comp Med 53:607- 615.
- Thigpen JE, Setchell KD, Saunders HE, Haseman JK, Grant MG, Forsythe DB. 2004. Selecting the appropriate rodent diet for endocrine disruptor research and testing studies. ILAR J 45:401-416.
- Vesterinen HV, Egan K, Deister A, Schlattmann P, Macleod MR, Dirnagl U. 2011. Systematic survey of the design, statistical analysis, and reporting of studies published in the 2008 volume of the Journal of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab 31:1064-1072.
- Kilkenny C, Browne WJ, Cuthill IC, Emerson M, Altman DG (2010) Improving Bioscience Research Reporting: The ARRIVE Guidelines for Reporting Animal Research. PLoS Biol 8(6): e1000412. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.1000412 · DOI · Paper page
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Reporting animal research: Explanation and elaboration for the ARRIVE guidelines 2.0
Percie du Sert, N., Ahluwalia, A., Alam, S., Avey, M. T., Baker, M., Browne, W. J., Clark, A., Cuthill, I. C., Dirnagl, U., Emerson, M., et al. (2020) · PLOS Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.3000411 · Cited by 2,677 · see citing works
Carbone, L., & Austin, J. (2016) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0155001 · Cited by 191 · see citing works
- Venue
- ILAR Journal
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2014-12-20
- Volume
- 55
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 536-540
- ISSN
- 1084-2020 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4245326224
- Cited by
- 18
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 1 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 2.92
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- ILAR Journal (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Wellcome Trust
- Australian Government
- British Heart Foundation
- Parkinson's UK
- Imperial College London
- University of Oxford
- National Centre for the Replacement, Refinement and Reduction of Animals in Research
- University of Bristol
- Directorate for Biological Sciences
- Medical Research Council
- Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Veterinary › Small Animals › Animal testing and alternatives
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Academic Writing and Publishing
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Research Data Management Practices
- Keywords
- animal studies, scientific reporting, animal experimentation, publication guidelines
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
