Cited by 44Animal testing and alternativesAnimal Behavior and Welfare StudiesMemory and Neural Mechanisms

Combining Animal Welfare With Experimental Rigor to Improve Reproducibility in Behavioral Neuroscience.

Open access
Loss, Cássio Morais, Melleu, Fernando Falkenburger, Domingues, Karolina, Lino-de-Oliveira, Cilene, Viola, Giordano Gubert·2021·Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience

Abstract

Grants of Alexander von Humboldt Foundation (Germany) to CLi. CML was recipient of Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES) research fellowship through the Instituto Nacional de Ciência e Tecnologia Translacional em Medicina (INCT-TM), Brazil. FM was supported by Post-doctoral fellowship grant #2018/25857-5, São Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP), Brazil. KD was supported by Fellow BIPD/FCT Proj2020/i3S/26040705/2021, Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia, Portugal. This study was financed in part by the Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior – Brasil (CAPES) – Finance Code 001.

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 · 10.3389/fnbeh.2021.763428

Cites

120 of 120 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?

  • Positive welfare manipulations may contribute to improved model validity and data reproducibility.

    “The use of manipulations to enhance positive welfare in laboratory animals has been shown not to be a source of variability ( Kentner et al., 2021), and a possible contribution towards improved model validity and data reproducibility ( Loss et al., 2021; Van De Weerd et al., 2004; Würbel & Garner, 2007).”
  • The use of manipulations to enhance positive welfare in laboratory animals has been shown not to be a source of variability.

    “The use of manipulations to enhance positive welfare in laboratory animals has been shown not to be a source of variability ( Kentner et al., 2021), and a possible contribution towards improved model validity and data reproducibility ( Loss et al., 2021; Van De Weerd et al., 2004; Würbel & Garner, 2007).”

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

1 of the 121 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Loss, C. M., Melleu, F. F., Domingues, K., Lino-de-Oliveira, C., & Viola, G. G.
Affiliations
  • Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (BR)
  • Universidade de São Paulo (BR)
  • Universidade do Porto (PT)
Corresponding author
Loss, Cássio Morais
Venue
Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience
Published
2021-11-30
Volume
15
Pages
763428-763428
ISSN
1662-5153 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3215397237
Cited by
44
References
121
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 5
FWCI
0.99
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Portuguese National Funding Agency for Science, Research and Technology (RCAAP Project by FCT) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (465458/2014-9 - INCT Translacional em Medicina)
  • Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (#2018/25857-5)
  • Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (BIPD/FCT Proj2020/i3S/26040705/2021)
  • Alexander von Humboldt-Stiftung (Equipment grants 2019)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Veterinary › Small Animals › Animal testing and alternatives
  • Health Sciences › Veterinary › Small Animals › Animal Behavior and Welfare Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
Keywords
animal welfare, reproducibility, psychobiology, experimental rigor, animal models, translational medicine

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