Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39315534›Full record

ArticleLaboratory animals2024

Simulation methodologies to determine statistical power in laboratory animal research studies.

Angela Jeffers, Kathryn Konrad, Gary Larson, Katherine Allen-Moyer, Helen Cunny, Keith Shockley

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Laboratory animals, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
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

6 authors.

Angela JeffersSocial & Scientific Systems, Inc., Durham, NC, USA.ORCID 0009-0007-3853-3354
Kathryn KonradSocial & Scientific Systems, Inc., Durham, NC, USA.ORCID 0009-0006-5393-1804
Gary LarsonSocial & Scientific Systems, Inc., Durham, NC, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-9998-9573
Katherine Allen-MoyerSocial & Scientific Systems, Inc., Durham, NC, USA.
Helen CunnyDivision of Translational Toxicology, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, Durham, NC, USA.
Keith ShockleyDivision of Intramural Research, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, Durham, NC, USA.

Funding

Intramural NIH HHS Z99 ES999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Null hypothesis significance testing is a statistical tool commonly employed throughout laboratory animal research. When experimental results are reported, the reproducibility of the results is of utmost importance. Establishing standard, robust, and adequately powered statistical methodology in the analysis of laboratory animal data is critical to ensure reproducible and valid results. Simulation studies are a reliable method for assessing the power of statistical tests, however, biologists may not be familiar with simulation studies for power despite their efficacy and accessibility. Through an example of simulated Harlan Sprague-Dawley (HSD) rat organ weight data, we highlight the importance of conducting power analyses in laboratory animal research. Using simulations to determine statistical power prior to an experiment is a financially and ethically sound way to validate statistical tests and to help ensure reproducibility of findings in line with the 4R principles of animal welfare.

Indexed as

Animal ExperimentationAnimals, LaboratoryRats, Sprague-DawleyAnimalsAnimal WelfareComputer SimulationRatsReproducibility of ResultsResearch Design4R principlesreproducibilitysample sizeStatistical powerstatistical simulations

Identifiers

PMID39315534
PMCPMC11588134

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.