ReviewAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2021
Quality of Reporting in Preclinical Urethral Tissue Engineering Studies: A Systematic Review to Assess Adherence to the ARRIVE Guidelines.
Review in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Adherence to Animal Research: Reporting of In Vivo Experiments Guidelines in Stem Cell Studies in Animal Models of Parkinson's Disease: A Systematic Review.Yonsei medical journal · 2025Pooled it
- The Ethical Implications of Tissue Engineering for Regenerative Purposes: A Systematic Review.Tissue engineering. Part B, Reviews · 2023Pooled it
- Innovations in the management of urethral stricture disease: emerging and regenerative strategies.The Canadian journal of urology · 2026Review
- Challenges of using tissue engineering methods in the treatment of hypospadias.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025Review
- 3D-bioprinted urethral grafts: Revolutionizing urethral stricture treatment.Arab journal of urology · 2025Review
- Reporting quality of animal research in journals that published the ARRIVE 1.0 or ARRIVE 2.0 guidelines: a cross-sectional analysis of 943 studies.Cardiovascular diagnosis and therapy · 2024Article
- Current advances in the development of microRNA-integrated tissue engineering strategies: a cornerstone of regenerative medicine.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2024Review
- Current perspectives in hypospadias research: A scoping review of articles published in 2021 (Review).Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Preclinical research within the area of urethral tissue engineering has not yet been successfully translated into an efficient therapeutic option for patients. This gap could be attributed, in part, to inadequate design and reporting of the studies employing laboratory animals. In this study, a systematic review was conducted to investigate the quality of reporting in preclinical studies utilizing tissue engineering approaches for urethral repair. The scope was on studies performed in rabbits, published between January 2014 and March 2020. Quality assessment of the data was conducted according to the Animal Research: Reporting of in Vivo Experiments (ARRIVE) guidelines by the scoring of a 38-item checklist in different categories. A total of 28 articles that fulfilled the eligibility criteria were included in the study. The range of ARRIVE score was from 0 to 100, taking into consideration having reported the item in question or not. The mean checklist score was 53%. The items that attained the highest scores included the number of animals utilized, the size of control and experimental groups, and the definition of experimental outcomes. The least frequently reported items included the data regarding the experimental procedure, housing and husbandry, determination and justification of the number of animals, and reporting of adverse events. Surprisingly, full disclosure about ethical guidelines and animal protocol approval was missing in 54% of the studies. No paper stated the sample size estimation. Overall, our study found that a large number of studies display inadequate reporting of fundamental information and that the quality of reporting improved marginally over the study period. We encourage a comprehensive implementation of the ARRIVE guidelines in animal studies exploring tissue engineering for urethral repair, not only to facilitate effective translation of preclinical research findings into clinical therapies, but also to ensure compliance with ethical principles and to minimize unnecessary animal studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.