ArticlePLoS biology2022
A guide to open science practices for animal research.
Article in PLoS biology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A systematic review of the development and application of home cage monitoring in laboratory mice and rats.BMC biology · 2023Pooled it
- Exploring open science in applied ethology: practice and attitudes among researchers.BMC research notes · 2026Article
- Advancing the 3Rs in bone tissue engineering: emergingFrontiers in physiology · 2026Review
- Enhancing translational research in metastatic cancer through an open science environment: the UPTIDER experience.NPJ precision oncology · 2025Article
- Building and Sustaining Open-Source Medical Device Projects.IEEE transactions on bio-medical engineering · 2025Review
- Assessing the knowledge of ethical clearance and animal welfare among researchers in Indonesia: A cross-sectional study.Veterinary world · 2025Article
- Article
- Are Open Science instructions targeted to ecologists and evolutionary biologists sufficient? A literature review of guidelines and journal data policies.Ecology and evolution · 2024Article
- A minimal metadata set (MNMS) to repurpose nonclinical in vivo data for biomedical research.Lab animal · 2024Review
- Daily life in the Open Biologist's second job, as a Data Curator.Wellcome open research · 2024Article
- Accentuating the positive and eliminating the negative: Efficacy of TiO2 as digestibility index marker for poultry nutrition studies.PloS one · 2023Article
- A guide to open science practices for animal research.PLoS biology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Translational biomedical research relies on animal experiments and provides the underlying proof of practice for clinical trials, which places an increased duty of care on translational researchers to derive the maximum possible output from every experiment performed. The implementation of open science practices has the potential to initiate a change in research culture that could improve the transparency and quality of translational research in general, as well as increasing the audience and scientific reach of published research. However, open science has become a buzzword in the scientific community that can often miss mark when it comes to practical implementation. In this Essay, we provide a guide to open science practices that can be applied throughout the research process, from study design, through data collection and analysis, to publication and dissemination, to help scientists improve the transparency and quality of their work. As open science practices continue to evolve, we also provide an online toolbox of resources that we will update continually.
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.