Cited by 1,321Animal testing and alternativesMeta-analysis and systematic reviewsAcademic Writing and Publishing

Implementing guidelines on reporting research using animals ( ARRIVE etc.): new requirements for publication in BJP

Open access
McGrath, John C, Lilley, Elliot·2015·British Journal of Pharmacology

Abstract

The ARRIVE guidelines have been implemented in BJP for 4 years with the aim of increasing transparency in reporting experiments involving animals. BJP has assessed our success in implementing them and concluded that we could do better. This editorial discusses the issues and explains how we are changing our requirements for authors to report their findings in experiments involving animals. This is one of a series of editorials discussing updates to the BJP Instructions to Authors Linked Editorials: This Editorial is part of a series. To view the other Editorials in this series, visit: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bph.12956/abstract ; http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bph.12954/abstract ; http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bph.13112/abstract and http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bph.12856/abstract . Video: To view the video on the ARRIVE guidelines, visit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DYXoUAnhoPM

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/bph.12955

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • There is evidence that in vivo scientists are not sufficiently aware of the importance of reporting the information covered in the guidelines and fail to appreciate the relevance to their work or their research field.

    “and there is evidence that in vivo scientists are not sufficiently aware of the importance of reporting the information covered in the guidelines and fail to appreciate the relevance to their work or their research field [12].”
  • The ethical statement provides editors, reviewers, and readers with assurance that studies have received ethical oversight.

    “The ethical statement provides editors, reviewers, and readers with assurance that studies have received this ethical oversight [12].”

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

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Baker D, Lidster K, Sottomayor A, Amor S (2013). Two Years Later: Journals Are Not Yet Enforcing the ARRIVE guidelines on Reporting Standards for Pre-Clinical Animal Studies. PLoS Biol 11(12):e1001756.
  2. Basel Declaration Society, http://www.basel-declaration.org British Journal of Pharmacology, Virtual Themed Issue 'Animal Models in Pharmacology Research', accessed 18/02/2014, http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/(ISSN)1476-5381/ homepage/animal_models.htm British Journal of Pharmacology, Virtual Themed Issue 'Statistical Reporting' accessed 18/02/2014, http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/ journal/10.1111/(ISSN)1476-5381/homepage/statistical_reporting .htm British Journal of Pharmacology (2015). Author Guidelines. Available at: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/ (ISSN)1476-5381/homepage/ForAuthors.html (accessed 10/2/2015). · DOI
  3. Curtis MJ, Bond RA, Spina D et al. (2015). Experimental design and analysis and their reporting: new guidance for publication in BJP. Br J Pharmacol 172. doi:10.1111/bph.12856 (in press). · DOI
  4. Kilkenny C, Parsons N, Kadyszewski E, Festing MFW, Cuthill IC et al. (2009). Survey of the Quality of Experimental Design, Statistical Analysis and Reporting of Research Using Animals. PLoS ONE 4(11): e7824. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0007824 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
McGrath, J. C., & Lilley, E.
Affiliations
  • University of Glasgow (GB)
  • Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (GB)
Corresponding author
McGrath, John C
Venue
British Journal of Pharmacology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2015-05-12
Volume
172
Issue
13
Pages
3189-3193
ISSN
  • 0007-1188 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-5381
OpenAlex
W1888470382
Cited by
1,321
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 31 · 2025: 53 · 2024: 61 · 2023: 67 · 2022: 74 · 2021: 106 · 2020: 160 · 2019: 164 · 2018: 169 · 2017: 258 · 2016: 157 · 2015: 18
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • British Journal of Pharmacology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Veterinary › Small Animals › Animal testing and alternatives
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Academic Writing and Publishing
Keywords
ARRIVE guidelines, animal research reporting, reporting guidelines, research transparency, author guidelines, animal experimentation, editorial policy
MeSH terms
Animals, Pharmacology, Guidelines as Topic, Guideline Adherence, Animal Experimentation, Editorial Policies, Biomedical Research

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