Cited by 1,592Animal testing and alternativesMeta-analysis and systematic reviewsAcademic Writing and Publishing

Guidelines for reporting experiments involving animals: the ARRIVE guidelines

Open access
McGrath, JC, Drummond, GB, McLachlan, EM, Kilkenny, C, Wainwright, CL·2010·British Journal of Pharmacology

Abstract

British Journal of Pharmacology (BJP) is pleased to publish a new set of guidelines for reporting research involving animals, simultaneously with several other journals; the 'ARRIVE' guidelines (Animals in Research: Reporting In Vivo Experiments). This editorial summarizes the background to the guidelines, gives our view of their significance, considers aspects of specific relevance to pharmacology, re-states BJP's guidelines for authors on animal experiments and indicates our commitment to carrying on discussion of this important topic. We also invite feedback via the British Pharmacological Society website.

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/j.1476-5381.2010.00873.x

Cites

5 of 5 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?

  • The ARRIVE guidelines were originally developed in 2010 to improve the reporting of animal research.

    “The ARRIVE guidelines (Animal Research: Reporting of In Vivo Experiments) were originally developed in 2010 to improve the reporting of animal research.”

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: 8

  1. Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) (2010). COPE best practice guidelines for journal editors. Available at: http://publicationethics.org/files/u2/Best_Practice.pdf (last accessed 5 April 2010).
  2. Council of Science Editors -Editorial Policy Committee (2009). CSE's White Paper on promoting integrity in scientific journal publications, 2009 Update. Available at: http://www.councilscienceeditors.org/ editorial_policies/whitepaper/entire_whitepaper.pdf (last accessed 5 April 2010).
  3. Drummond GB (2009). Reporting ethical matters in The Journal of Physiology: standards and advice. J Physiol 587: 713-719.
  4. International Council of Medical Journal Editors (2008). Uniform requirements for manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals. Available at: http://www.icmje.org/ urm_full.pdf (last accessed 5 April 2010).
  5. Kilkenny C, Parsons N, Kadyszewski E, Festing MFW, Cuthill IC, Fry D et al. (2009). Survey of the quality of experimental design, statistical analysis and reporting of research using animals. PLoS One 4: e7824. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0007824. · DOI · Paper page
  6. Kilkenny C, Browne W, Cuthill IC, Emerson M, Altman DG (2010c). Animal research: reporting in vivo experiments: The ARRIVE Guidelines. Exp Physiol doi:10.1113/expphysiol.2010.053793. · DOI · Paper page
  7. Kilkenny C, Browne W, Cuthill IC, Emerson M, Altman DG (2010e). Animal research: reporting in vivo experiments: The ARRIVE Guidelines. J Physiol doi:10.1113/jphysiol.2010.192278. · DOI
  8. Nuffield Council on Bioethics (2005). The Ethics of Research involving Animals Chapter 15: Discussion and Recommendations; pp 313, paragraph 15.58. Available at: http://www.nuffieldbioethics.org/fileLibrary/pdf/ RIA_Report_FINAL-opt.pdf (last accessed 26 January 2010).

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
McGrath, J., Drummond, G., McLachlan, E., Kilkenny, C., & Wainwright, C.
Affiliations
  • Edinburgh Royal Infirmary (GB)
  • National Centre for the Replacement Refinement and Reduction of Animals in Research (GB)
Venue
British Journal of Pharmacology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2010-07-06
Volume
160
Issue
7
Pages
1573-1576
ISSN
  • 0007-1188 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-5381
OpenAlex
W1916800927
Cited by
1,592
References
5
Citations by year
2026: 43 · 2025: 54 · 2024: 45 · 2023: 56 · 2022: 65 · 2021: 65 · 2020: 102 · 2019: 86 · 2018: 75 · 2017: 76 · 2016: 74 · 2015: 233 · 2014: 235 · 2013: 191 · 2012: 183
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • British Journal of Pharmacology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • ENLIGHTEN (Jurnal Bimbingan dan Konseling Islam) (submittedVersion)
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, reporting guidelines, animal studies, in vivo experiments, animal experimentation, reporting quality, pharmacological research, author guidelines
MeSH terms
Animals, United Kingdom, Pharmacology, Guidelines as Topic, 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