Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38872792›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in veterinary science2024

Impact of quality and transparency in scientific writing on the reduction of animal usage in experimental protocols: a review based in pertinent literature.

Matheus M Neves, Sandra G Klein, Ray C Silva, Lucas M M Bernardes, Serena M Malta, Thiago N Vieira, Rafael B Rosa, Isabela L Lima, Flávia B Ferreira, Murilo V Silva

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in veterinary science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Matheus M NevesBiotechnology in Experimental Models Laboratory - LABME, Federal University of Uberlândia, Uberlândia, Brazil.
Sandra G KleinBiotechnology in Experimental Models Laboratory - LABME, Federal University of Uberlândia, Uberlândia, Brazil.
Ray C SilvaBiotechnology in Experimental Models Laboratory - LABME, Federal University of Uberlândia, Uberlândia, Brazil.
Lucas M M BernardesInstitute of Biotechnology, Federal University of Uberlândia, Uberlândia, Brazil.
Serena M MaltaInstitute of Biotechnology, Federal University of Uberlândia, Uberlândia, Brazil.
Thiago N VieiraInstitute of Biotechnology, Federal University of Uberlândia, Uberlândia, Brazil.
Rafael B RosaRodents Animal Facilities Complex, Federal University of Uberlandia, Uberlândia, Brazil.
Isabela L LimaBiotechnology in Experimental Models Laboratory - LABME, Federal University of Uberlândia, Uberlândia, Brazil.
Flávia B FerreiraBiotechnology in Experimental Models Laboratory - LABME, Federal University of Uberlândia, Uberlândia, Brazil.
Murilo V SilvaBiotechnology in Experimental Models Laboratory - LABME, Federal University of Uberlândia, Uberlândia, Brazil.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The irreproducibility in scientific research has become a critical issue. Despite the essential role of rigorous methodology in constructing a scientific article, more than half of publications, on average, are considered non-reproducible. The implications of this irreproducibility extend to reliability problems, hindering progress in technological production and resulting in substantial financial losses. In the context of laboratory animal research, this work emphasizes the importance of choosing an appropriate experimental model within the 3R's principle (Refine, Reduce, Replace). This study specifically addresses a deficiency in data specification in scientific articles, revealing inadequacies in the description of crucial details, such as environmental conditions, diet, and experimental procedures. For this purpose, 124 articles from journals with relevant impact factors were analyzed, conducting a survey of data considered important for the reproducibility of studies. Important flaws in the presentation of data were identified in most of the articles evaluated. The results of this study highlight the need to improve the description of essential information, standardizing studies, and ensuring the reproducibility of experiments in areas such as metabolism, immunity, hormones, stress, among others, to enhance the reliability and reproduction of experimental results, aligning with international guidelines such as ARRIVE and PREPARE.

Indexed as

3R’sanimal modelsdata reproducibilitylaboratory animal sciencescientific writing

Identifiers

PMID38872792
PMCPMC11169789

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.