Gold Standard Publication Checklist to Improve the Quality of Animal Studies, to Fully Integrate the Three Rs, and to Make Systematic Reviews More Feasible

By Hooijmans, Carlijn R. - Leenaars, Marlies - Ritskes-Hoitinga, Merel

Systematic reviews are generally regarded by professionals in the field of evidence-based medicine as the highest level of medical evidence, and they are already standard practice for clinical studies. However, they are not yet widely used nor undertaken in the field of animal experimentation, even though there is a lot to be gained from the process. Therefore, a gold standard publication checklist (GSPC) for animal studies is presented in this paper. The items on the checklist have been selected on the basis of a literature analysis and the resulting scientific evidence that these factors are decisive in determining the outcome of animal studies. In order to make future systematic reviews and meta-analyses of animal studies possible, to allow others to replicate and build on work previously published, diminish the number of animals needed in animal experimentation (reduction), improve animal welfare (refinement) and, above all, improve the quality of scientific papers on animal experimentation, this publication checklist needs to be used and followed. We have discussed and optimised this GSPC through feedback from interviews with experts in the field of animal experimentation. From these interviews, it became clear that scientists will adopt this GSPC when journals demand it. The GSPC was compared with the current instructions for authors from nine different journals, selected on the basis that they featured a high number of publications on animal studies. In general, the journals' demands for the description of the animal studies are so limited that it is not possible to repeat the studies, let alone carry out a systematic review. By using the GSPC for animal studies, the quality of scientific papers will be improved. The use of the GSPC and the concomitant improvement in the quality of scientific papers will also contribute to decreased variation and increased standardisation and, as a consequence, a reduction in the numbers of animals used and a more reliable outcome of animal studies. It is of major importance that journal editors become convinced of and adopt these recommendations, because only then will scientists follow these guidelines to the full extent.



Issued: May 2010

Journal Title: Alternatives to laboratory animals

ISSN: 0261-1929

Volume issue: 38 v. 2 no.

Pages: 167 - 182

Publisher: FRAME

AGRICOLA identifier: IND44601311
This page was updated on 11 February 2021
Fant du det du lette etter?
Ja, jeg fant det! Nei, jeg fant det ikke!

Takk for din tilbakemelding! Vær oppmerksom på at vi ikke kan kontakte deg hvis ikke du oppgir din epostadresse.

Hva lette du etter?

Gi oss gjerne en tilbakemelding slik at vi kan forbedre informasjonen på siden. På forhånd takk for hjelpen! Vennligst skriv inn din epostadresse hvis du vil ha et svar.

Kontakt oss gjerne på e-post hvis du har spørsmål.

Takk for din tilbakemelding! Vær oppmerksom på at vi ikke kan kontakte deg hvis ikke du oppgir din epostadresse.

RadioButtonList field
 

Abonnér på nyhetsbrevene fra Norecopa