The DOI matches its Crossref record; 68 of the 69 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Need for Randomization in Animal Trials: An Overview of Systematic Reviews
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Randomization, allocation concealment, and blind outcome assessment have been shown to reduce bias in human studies. Authors from the Collaborative Approach to Meta Analysis and Review of Animal Data from Experimental Studies (CAMARADES) collaboration recently found that these features protect against bias in animal stroke studies. We extended the scope the work from CAMARADES to include investigations of treatments for any condition. METHODS: We conducted an overview of systematic reviews. We searched Medline and Embase for systematic reviews of animal studies testing any intervention (against any control) and we included any disease area and outcome. We included reviews comparing randomized versus not randomized (but otherwise controlled), concealed versus unconcealed treatment allocation, or blinded versus unblinded outcome assessment. RESULTS: Thirty-one systematic reviews met our inclusion criteria: 20 investigated treatments for experimental stroke, 4 reviews investigated treatments for spinal cord diseases, while 1 review each investigated treatments for bone cancer, intracerebral hemorrhage, glioma, multiple sclerosis, Parkinson's disease, and treatments used in emergency medicine. In our sample 29% of studies reported randomization, 15% of studies reported allocation concealment, and 35% of studies reported blinded outcome assessment. We pooled the results in a meta-analysis, and in our primary analysis found that failure to randomize significantly increased effect sizes, whereas allocation concealment and blinding did not. In our secondary analyses we found that randomization, allocation concealment, and blinding reduced effect sizes, especially where outcomes were subjective. CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrates the need for randomization, allocation concealment, and blind outcome assessment in animal research across a wide range of outcomes and disease areas. Since human studies are often justified based on results from animal studies, our results suggest that unduly biased animal studies should not be allowed to constitute part of the rationale for human trials.
Overview
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
Verification
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?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“There are, however, compelling data from systematic reviews showing that nonblinded outcome assessment leads to the treatment effects being overestimated, and the lack of bias-reducing measures such as randomisation and blinding can contribute to as much as 30%–45% inflation of effect sizes [67,68,85].”
From Reporting animal research: Explanation and elaboration for the ARRIVE guidelines 2.0 (2020) · cites this paper as [67]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“There are, however, compelling data from systematic reviews showing that nonblinded outcome assessment leads to the treatment effects being overestimated, and the lack of bias-reducing measures such as randomisation and blinding can contribute to as much as 30%–45% inflation of effect sizes [67,68,85].”
From Reporting animal research: Explanation and elaboration for the ARRIVE guidelines 2.0 (2020) · cites this paper as [67]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Systematic reviews have shown that animal experiments that do not report randomisation or other bias-reducing measures such as blinding are more likely to report exaggerated effects that meet conventional measures of statistical significance [67–69].”
From Reporting animal research: Explanation and elaboration for the ARRIVE guidelines 2.0 (2020) · cites this paper as [67]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Meta-analysis in clinical trials
DerSimonian, R., & Laird, N. (1986) · Controlled Clinical Trials · doi:10.1016/0197-2456(86)90046-2 · Cited by 39,552
Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions: Cochrane Book Series
(2008) · doi:10.1002/9780470712184 · Cited by 25,048
Improving bioscience research reporting: The ARRIVE guidelines for reporting animal research
Kilkenny, C., Browne, W. J., Cuthill, I. C., Emerson, M., & Altman, D. G. (2010) · Journal of Pharmacology and Pharmacotherapeutics · doi:10.4103/0976-500x.72351 · Cited by 6,277
Schulz (1995) · doi:10.1001/jama.1995.03520290060030 · Cited by 5,634
Assessing the quality of controlled clinical trials
Jüni, P., Altman, D. G., & Egger, M. (2001) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.323.7303.42 · Cited by 3,309 · cited 1×
“[6] This is because concealed random allocation reduces selection bias and blinding outcome assessors reduces detection bias.”
BackgroundVitamin E Supplementation and Cardiovascular Events in High-Risk Patients
(2000) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm200001203420302 · Cited by 1,957
Sex bias in neuroscience and biomedical research
Beery, A. K., & Zucker, I. (2011) · Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2010.07.002 · Cited by 1,763
Decousus, H., Leizorovicz, A., Parent, F., Page, Y., Tardy, B., Girard, P., Laporte, S., Faivre, R., Charbonnier, B., Barral, F.-G., et al. (1998) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm199802123380701 · Cited by 1,702
Rules of Evidence and Clinical Recommendations on the Use of Antithrombotic Agents
Sackett, D. L. (1989) · CHEST Journal · doi:10.1378/chest.95.2_supplement.2s · Cited by 1,369
A call for transparent reporting to optimize the predictive value of preclinical research
Landis, S. C., Amara, S. G., Asadullah, K., Austin, C. P., Blumenstein, R., Bradley, E. W., Crystal, R. G., Darnell, R. B., Ferrante, R. J., Fillit, H., et al. (2012) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature11556 · Cited by 1,196
Effect of Fluoride Treatment on the Fracture Rate in Postmenopausal Women with Osteoporosis
Riggs, B. L., Hodgson, S. F., O’Fallon, W. M., Chao, E. Y. S., Wahner, H. W., Muhs, J. M., Cedel, S. L., & Melon, L. J. (1990) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm199003223221203 · Cited by 1,083
Savović, J., Jones, H. E., Altman, D. G., Harris, R. J., Jüni, P., Pildal, J., Als-Nielsen, B., Balk, E. M., Gluud, C., Gluud, L. L., et al. (2012) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-157-6-201209180-00537 · Cited by 1,049
Comparison of Treatment Effects between Animal Experiments and Clinical Trials: Systematic Review
Perel, P., Roberts, I., Sena, E., Wheble, P., Briscoe, C., Sandercock, P., Macleod, M., Mignini, L. E., Jayaram, P., & Khan, K. S. (2007) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.39048.407928.be · Cited by 827
Pooling of Animal Experimental Data Reveals Influence of Study Design and Publication Bias
Macleod, M. R., O’Collins, T., Howells, D. W., & Donnan, G. A. (2004) · Stroke · doi:10.1161/01.str.0000125719.25853.20 · Cited by 734
Antioxidant Vitamin Intake and Coronary Mortality in a Longitudinal Population Study
Knekt, P., Reunanen, A., Jävinen, R., Seppänen, R., Heliövaara, M., & Aromaa, A. J. (1994) · American Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a116964 · Cited by 635
Publication bias in reports of animal stroke studies leads to major overstatement of efficacy
Sena, E. S., van der Worp, H. B., Bath, P. M. W., Howells, D. W., & Macleod, M. R. (2010) · PLoS Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.1000344 · Cited by 600
External Validation of a Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR)
Shea, B. J., Bouter, L. M., Peterson, J., Boers, M., Andersson, N., Ortiz, Z., Ramsay, T., Bai, A., Shukla, V. K., & Grimshaw, J. M. (2007) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0001350 · Cited by 569
Hypothermia in animal models of acute ischaemic stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
van der Worp, H. B., Sena, E., Donnan, G., Howells, D., & Macleod, M. (2007) · Brain : a journal of neurology · doi:10.1093/brain/awm083 · Cited by 520
Behavioural response to humans and the productivity of commercial dairy cows
Breuer, K., Hemsworth, P. H., Barnett, J. L., Matthews, L. R., & Coleman, G. J. (2000) · Applied Animal Behaviour Science · doi:10.1016/s0168-1591(99)00097-0 · Cited by 441
Randomisation to protect against selection bias in healthcare trials
Odgaard-Jensen, J., Vist, G. E., Timmer, A., Kunz, R., Akl, E. A., Schünemann, H., Briel, M., Nordmann, A. J., Pregno, S., & Oxman, A. D. (2011) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.mr000012.pub3 · Cited by 439
The Philosophy of Evidence‐Based Medicine
Howick, J. (2011) · Wiley eBooks · doi:10.1002/9781444342673 · Cited by 434
Self-citationInternational Committee of Medical Journal Editors.
Riis, P. J. (1990) · PubMed · Cited by 415
How can we improve the pre-clinical development of drugs for stroke?
Sena, E. S., van der Worp, H. B., Howells, D. W., & Macleod, M. R. (2007) · Trends in Neurosciences · doi:10.1016/j.tins.2007.06.009 · Cited by 367
Henderson, V. C., Kimmelman, J., Fergusson, D. A., Grimshaw, J., & Hackam, D. G. (2013) · PLoS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1001489 · Cited by 331
Macleod, M. R., van der Worp, H. B., Sena, E. S., Howells, D. W., Dirnagl, U., & Donnan, G. A. (2008) · Stroke · doi:10.1161/strokeaha.108.515957 · Cited by 319
Rules of Evidence and Clinical Recommendations on the Use of Antithrombotic Agents
Sackett, D. L. (1986) · CHEST Journal · doi:10.1378/chest.89.2_supplement.2s · Cited by 259
Emergency medicine animal research: does use of randomization and blinding affect the results?
Bebarta, V., Luyten, D., & Heard, K. (2003) · Academic Emergency Medicine · doi:10.1111/j.1553-2712.2003.tb00056.x · Cited by 244
The Philosophy of Evidence‐Based Medicine
Howick, J. (2011) · doi:10.1002/9781444342673.ch1 · Cited by 236
Self-citationEmpirical Evidence of Bias in the Design of Experimental Stroke Studies
Crossley, N. A., Sena, E. S., Göhler, J., Horn, J., van der Worp, H. B., Bath, P. M., Macleod, M. R., & Dirnagl, U. (2008) · Stroke · doi:10.1161/strokeaha.107.498725 · Cited by 235
Nimodipine in Animal Model Experiments of Focal Cerebral Ischemia
Horn, J., de Haan, R. J., Vermeulen, M., Luiten, P. G. M., & Limburg, M. (2001) · Stroke · doi:10.1161/hs1001.096009 · Cited by 231
A quality assessment of randomized control trials of primary treatment of breast cancer.
Liberati, A., Himel, H. N., & Chalmers, T. C. (1986) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.1986.4.6.942 · Cited by 196
Improving the translational hit of experimental treatments in multiple sclerosis
Vesterinen, H. M., Sena, E. S., ffrench-Constant, C., Williams, A., Chandran, S., & Macleod, M. R. (2010) · Multiple Sclerosis Journal · doi:10.1177/1352458510379612 · Cited by 182
Systematic Review and Metaanalysis of the Efficacy of FK506 in Experimental Stroke
Macleod, M. R., O’Collins, T., Horky, L. L., Howells, D. W., & Donnan, G. A. (2005) · Journal of Cerebral Blood Flow & Metabolism · doi:10.1038/sj.jcbfm.9600064 · Cited by 176
Sackett, D. L. (1969) · American Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a120921 · Cited by 174
Evidence-based medicine how to practice & teach EBM
Robinson, J. (1997) · Australian College of Midwives Incorporated Journal · doi:10.1016/s1031-170x(97)80036-0 · Cited by 156
Estrogens and Experimental Ischemic Stroke: A Systematic Review
Gibson, C. L., Gray, L. J., Murphy, S. P., & Bath, P. M. (2006) · Journal of Cerebral Blood Flow & Metabolism · doi:10.1038/sj.jcbfm.9600270 · Cited by 142
An Enriched Environment Improves Sensorimotor Function Post-Ischemic Stroke
Janssen, H., Bernhardt, J. A., Collier, J. M., Sena, E. S., McElduff, P., Attia, J., Pollack, M. R. P., Howells, D. W., Nilsson, M., Calford, M. B., et al. (2010) · Neurorehabilitation and neural repair · doi:10.1177/1545968310372092 · Cited by 139
Systematic review and meta‐analysis of the efficacy of melatonin in experimental stroke
Macleod, M. R., O'Collins, T., Horky, L. L., Howells, D., & Donnan, G. A. (2005) · Journal of Pineal Research · doi:10.1111/j.1600-079x.2004.00172.x · Cited by 137
Animal models of bone cancer pain: Systematic review and meta-analyses
Currie, G. L., Delaney, A., Bennett, M., Dickenson, A. H., Egan, K. J., Vesterinen, H. M., Sena, E. S., Macleod, M. R., Colvin, L., & Fallon, M. (2013) · Pain · doi:10.1016/j.pain.2013.02.033 · Cited by 136
Antonic‐Baker, A., Sena, E. S., Lees, J. S., Wills, T. E., Skeers, P., Batchelor, P., Macleod, M. R., & Howells, D. W. (2013) · PLoS Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.1001738 · Cited by 134
Stem Cell-Based Therapy for Experimental Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Lees, J. S., Sena, E. S., Egan, K. J., Antonic‐Baker, A., Koblar, S. A., Howells, D. W., & Macleod, M. R. (2012) · International Journal of Stroke · doi:10.1111/j.1747-4949.2012.00797.x · Cited by 132
Evolution and Translation of Research Findings: From Bench to Where
Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2006) · PLoS Clinical Trials · doi:10.1371/journal.pctr.0010036 · Cited by 129
Banwell, V., Sena, E. S., & Macleod, M. R. (2009) · Journal of Stroke and Cerebrovascular Diseases · doi:10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2008.11.009 · Cited by 123
Effects of NXY‐059 in experimental stroke: an individual animal meta‐analysis
Bath, P. M., Gray, L. J., Bath, A. J. G., Buchan, A. M., Miyata, T., & Green, A. R. (2009) · British Journal of Pharmacology · doi:10.1111/j.1476-5381.2009.00196.x · Cited by 122
Sena, E., Briscoe, C., Howells, D., Donnan, G., Sandercock, P., & Macleod, M. (2010) · Journal of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism · doi:10.1038/jcbfm.2010.116 · Cited by 118
Batchelor, P., Wills, T. E., Skeers, P., Battistuzzo, C. R., Macleod, M. R., Howells, D. W., & Sena, E. S. (2013) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0072659 · Cited by 115
Methodological quality of animal studies on neuroprotection in focal cerebral ischaemia
van der Worp, H. B., de Haan, P. S., Morrema, E., & Kalkman, C. J. (2005) · Journal of Neurology · doi:10.1007/s00415-005-0802-3 · Cited by 111
A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Erythropoietin in Experimental Stroke
Jerndal, M. J., Forsberg, K. O., Sena, E., Macleod, M. R., O'Collins, V. E., Lindén, T., Nilsson, M., & Howells, D. W. (2010) · Journal of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism · doi:10.1038/jcbfm.2009.267 · Cited by 110
Hirst, T. C., Vesterinen, H. M., Sena, E. S., Egan, K. J., Macleod, M. R., & Whittle, I. R. (2013) · British Journal of Cancer · doi:10.1038/bjc.2012.504 · Cited by 106
Watzlawick, R., Sena, E. S., Dirnagl, U., Brommer, B., Kopp, M. A., Macleod, M. R., Howells, D. W., & Schwab, J. M. (2013) · JAMA Neurology · doi:10.1001/jamaneurol.2013.4684 · Cited by 101
Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Efficacy of Tirilazad in Experimental Stroke
Sena, E. S., Wheble, P. C. R., Sandercock, P. A., & Macleod, M. R. (2007) · Stroke · doi:10.1161/01.str.0000254462.75851.22 · Cited by 95
Should preclinical studies be registered?
Kimmelman, J., & Anderson, J. A. (2012) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/nbt.2261 · Cited by 91
Bath, P. M. W., Macleod, M. R., & Green, A. (2009) · International Journal of Stroke · doi:10.1111/j.1747-4949.2009.00386.x · Cited by 83
Dopamine agonists in animal models of Parkinson’s disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Rooke, E. D., Vesterinen, H. M., Sena, E. S., Egan, K. J., & Macleod, M. R. (2011) · Parkinsonism & Related Disorders · doi:10.1016/j.parkreldis.2011.02.010 · Cited by 76
Vesterinen, H. M., Egan, K. J., Deister, A., Schlattmann, P., Macleod, M. R., & Dirnagl, U. (2010) · Journal of Cerebral Blood Flow & Metabolism · doi:10.1038/jcbfm.2010.217 · Cited by 63
Treatment of intracerebral hemorrhage in animal models: Meta‐analysis
Frantzias, J., Sena, E. S., Macleod, M. R., & Salman, R. A. (2011) · Annals of Neurology · doi:10.1002/ana.22243 · Cited by 61
Batchelor, P., Skeers, P., Antonic‐Baker, A., Wills, T. E., Howells, D. W., Macleod, M. R., & Sena, E. S. (2013) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0071317 · Cited by 58
Heart Rate Changes in the Horse to Human Contact
Lynch, J. J., Fregin, G. F., Mackie, J. B., & Monroe, R. R. (1974) · Psychophysiology · doi:10.1111/j.1469-8986.1974.tb00575.x · Cited by 56
Egan, K. J., Janssen, H., Sena, E. S., Longley, L., Speare, S., Howells, D. W., Spratt, N. J., Macleod, M. R., Mead, G. E., & Bernhardt, J. (2014) · Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair · doi:10.1177/1545968314521694 · Cited by 49
Vesterinen, H. M., Currie, G. L., Carter, S., Mee, S., Watzlawick, R., Egan, K. J., Macleod, M. R., & Sena, E. S. (2013) · Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1186/2046-4053-2-33 · Cited by 48
Wheble, P. C. R., Sena, E. S., & Macleod, M. R. (2007) · Cerebrovascular Diseases · doi:10.1159/000111493 · Cited by 41
Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Interventions Tested in Animal Models of Lacunar Stroke
Pedder, H., Vesterinen, H. M., Macleod, M. R., & Wardlaw, J. M. (2014) · Stroke · doi:10.1161/strokeaha.113.003128 · Cited by 36
Farley, S. M., Libanati, C. R., Odvina, C. V., Smith, L. C., Eliel, L. P., Wakley, G. K., Kilcoyne, R. F., SCHULZ, E. E., & Baylink, D. J. (1989) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/0895-4356(89)90048-6 · Cited by 14
Animal models of neurological disease: are there any babies in the bathwater?
Macleod, M. R., & van der Worp, H. B. (2010) · Practical Neurology · doi:10.1136/jnnp.2010.230524 · Cited by 13
EQUATOR Network collates resources for good research
Simera, I. (2008) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.a2471 · Cited by 11
Peirce's ten trichotomies: Metaphor, hypothesis, and decision
Sabre, R. M. (2012) · Semiotica · doi:10.1515/sem-2012-0037 · Cited by 9
Coronary blood flow in dogs: Effect of person
Newton, J. E. O., & Ehrlich, W. (1993) · Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science · doi:10.1007/bf02691245 · Cited by 6
How to Avoid Bumping into the Translational Roadblock
Macleod, M. R. (2010) · Neuromethods · doi:10.1007/978-1-60761-750-1_2 · Cited by 4
Flagged first, then by citations
1 of the 69 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.
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
“There are, however, compelling data from systematic reviews showing that nonblinded outcome assessment leads to the treatment effects being overestimated, and the lack of bias-reducing measures such as randomisation and blinding can contribute to as much as 30%–45% inflation of effect sizes [67,68,85].”
BackgroundThe Mass Production of Redundant, Misleading, and Conflicted Systematic Reviews and Meta‐analyses
IOANNIDIS, J. P. A. (2016) · The Milbank Quarterly · doi:10.1111/1468-0009.12210 · Cited by 1,483
Methods Used to Evaluate Pain Behaviors in Rodents
Deuis, J. R., Dvorakova, L. S., & Vetter, I. (2017) · Frontiers in Molecular Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnmol.2017.00284 · Cited by 1,269
Reporting animal research: Explanation and Elaboration for the ARRIVE guidelines 2019Preprint
du Sert, N. P., Ahluwalia, A., Alam, S., Avey, M. T., Baker, M., Browne, W. J., Clark, A., Cuthill, I. C., Dirnagl, U., Emerson, M., et al. (2019) · bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · doi:10.1101/703355 · Cited by 557
Increasing value and reducing waste in biomedical research: who's listening?
Moher, D., Glasziou, P., Chalmers, I., Nasser, M., Bossuyt, P. M. M., Korevaar, D. A., Graham, I. D., Ravaud, P., & Boutron, I. (2016) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(15)00307-4 · Cited by 462
Metadata
- Authors
- Hirst, J. A., Howick, J., Aronson, J. K., Roberts, N., Perera, R., Koshiaris, C., & Heneghan, C.
- Affiliations
- University of Oxford (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Hirst, Jennifer A.
- Howick, Jeremy
- ORCID
- Venue
- PLoS ONE
- Publisher
- Public Library of Science (PLoS)
- Published
- 2014-06-06
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- e98856
- ISSN
- 1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC4048216
- OpenAlex
- W2037669635
- Cited by
- 294
- References
- 69
- Citations by year
- 2026: 18 · 2025: 25 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 25 · 2022: 28 · 2021: 38 · 2020: 30 · 2019: 21 · 2018: 20 · 2017: 19 · 2016: 32 · 2015: 16 · 2014: 1
- FWCI
- 6.20
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Locations
- PLoS ONE (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Funders
- National Institute for Health and Care Research
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
- Health Sciences › Veterinary › Small Animals › Animal testing and alternatives
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials
- Keywords
- randomization, allocation concealment, blinding, animal models, effect size
- MeSH terms
- Animals, Research Design, Review Literature as Topic, Bias, Animal Experimentation
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
