Risk of Bias in Reports of In Vivo Research: A Focus for Improvement

PLoS Biology

Volumn 13, Issue 10, 2015, Pages 1-12

  Macleod, Malcolm R ^a   Lawson McLean, Aaron ^a   Kyriakopoulou, Aikaterini ^a   Serghiou, Stylianos ^a   de Wilde, Arno ^b   Sherratt, Nicki ^a   Hirst, Theo ^a   Hemblade, Rachel ^a   Bahor, Zsanett ^a   Nunes Fonseca, Cristina ^a   Potluru, Aparna ^a   Thomson, Andrew ^a   Baginskitae, Julija ^a   Egan, Kieren ^a   Vesterinen, Hanna ^a   Currie, Gillian L ^a   Churilov, Leonid ^c   Howells, David W ^d   Sena, Emily S ^a,c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER UTRECHT   (Netherlands)

^c FLOREY INSTITUTE OF NEUROSCIENCE AND MENTAL HEALTH   (Australia)

^d UNIVERSITY OF TASMANIA   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; IN VIVO STUDY; PREVALENCE; PUBLICATION; RANDOM SAMPLE; RANDOMIZATION; RELIABILITY; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK FACTOR; RISK REDUCTION; SAMPLE SIZE; SYSTEMATIC ERROR; UNITED KINGDOM; ANIMAL; BIOMEDICINE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; HUMAN; JOURNAL IMPACT FACTOR; MEASUREMENT ACCURACY; MEDICAL RESEARCH; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PROCEDURES; PUBLISHING; SELECTION BIAS; STANDARDS; TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT; TRENDS;

ANIMALS; BIOLOGICAL SCIENCE DISCIPLINES; BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH; DATA ACCURACY; GUIDELINES AS TOPIC; HUMANS; JOURNAL IMPACT FACTOR; PERIODICALS AS TOPIC; PUBLICATION BIAS; QUALITY IMPROVEMENT; SELECTION BIAS; UNITED KINGDOM;

EID: 84946089769     PISSN: 15449173     EISSN: 15457885     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pbio.1002273     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Landis SC, Amara SG, Asadullah K, Austin CP, Blumenstein R, Bradley EW, et al. A call for transparent reporting to optimize the predictive value of preclinical research. Nature 2012 Oct 11;490(7419):187–91. doi: 10.1038/nature11556 23060188
2. van der Worp HB, Howells DW, Sena ES, Porritt MJ, Rewell S, O'Collins V, et al. Can animal models of disease reliably inform human studies? PLoS Med 2010 Mar 30;7(3):e1000245. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000245 20361020
3. Crossley NA, Sena E, Goehler J, Horn J, van der Worp B, Bath PMW, et al. Empirical Evidence of Bias in the Design of Experimental Stroke Studies. A Metaepidemiologic Approach. Stroke 2008 Jan 31; 39(3):929–934. doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.107.498725 18239164
4. Hirst JA, Howick J, Aronson JK, Roberts N, Perera R, Koshiaris C, et al. The need for randomization in animal trials: an overview of systematic reviews. PLoS One 2014 Jun 6;9(6):e98856. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0098856 24906117
5. Macleod MR, O'Collins T, Horky LL, Howells DW, Donnan GA, Systematic review and metaanalysis of the efficacy of FK506 in experimental stroke. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab 2005 Jun;25(6):713–21. 15703698
6. Rooke ED, Vesterinen HM, Sena ES, Egan KJ, Macleod MR, Dopamine agonists in animal models of Parkinson's disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Parkinsonism Relat Disord 2011 Jun;17(5):313–20. doi: 10.1016/j.parkreldis.2011.02.010 21376651
7. Vesterinen HM, Sena ES, ffrench-Constant C, Williams A, Chandran S, Macleod MR, Improving the translational hit of experimental treatments in multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler 2010 Sep;16(9):1044–55. doi: 10.1177/1352458510379612 20685763
8. McNutt M, Journals unite for reproducibility. Science 2014 Nov 7;346(6210):679. 25383411
9. Anon. Announcement: Reducing our Irreproducibility. Nature 2013, 496, 398.
10. Journals unite for reproducibility. Nature 2014 Nov 6;515(7525):7.
11. Currie GL, Delaney A, Bennett MI, Dickenson AH, Egan KJ, Vesterinen HM, et al. Animal models of bone cancer pain: systematic review and meta-analyses. Pain 2013 Jun;154(6):917–26. doi: 10.1016/j.pain.2013.02.033 23582155
12. Hirst TC, Vesterinen HM, Sena ES, Egan KJ, Macleod MR, Whittle IR, Systematic review and meta-analysis of temozolomide in animal models of glioma: was clinical efficacy predicted? Br J Cancer 2013 Jan 15;108(1):64–71. doi: 10.1038/bjc.2012.504 23321511
13. Frantzias J, Sena ES, Macleod MR, Al-Shahi SR, Treatment of intracerebral hemorrhage in animal models: meta-analysis. Ann Neurol 2011 Feb;69(2):389–99. doi: 10.1002/ana.22243 21387381
14. Macleod MR, O'Collins T, Howells DW, Donnan GA, Pooling of animal experimental data reveals influence of study design and publication bias. Stroke 2004 May;35(5):1203–8. 15060322
15. Kilkenny C, Parsons N, Kadyszewski E, Festing MF, Cuthill IC, Fry D, et al. Survey of the quality of experimental design, statistical analysis and reporting of research using animals. PLoS One 2009 Nov 30;4(11):e7824. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0007824 19956596
16. Baker D, Lidster K, Sottomayor A, Amor S, Two years later: journals are not yet enforcing the ARRIVE guidelines on reporting standards for pre-clinical animal studies. PLoS Biol 2014 Jan;12(1):e1001756. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.1001756 24409096
17. Ioannidis JP, Greenland S, Hlatky MA, Khoury MJ, Macleod MR, Moher D, et al. Increasing value and reducing waste in research design, conduct, and analysis. Lancet 2014 Jan 11;383(9912):166–75. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(13)62227-8 24411645
18. Krauth D, Anglemyer A, Philipps R, Bero L, Nonindustry-Sponsored Preclinical Studies on Statins Yield Greater Efficacy Estimates Than Industry-Sponsored Studies: A Meta-Analysis. PLoS Biol 2014; 12(1): e1001770. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.1001770 24465178
19. Abdel-Sattar M, Krauth D, Anglemyer A, Bero L, The relationship between risk of bias criteria, research outcomes, and study sponsorship in a cohort of preclinical thiazolidinedione animal studies: a meta-analysis. Evid Based Preclin Med 2014;1:11–20. 25642330
20. Lundh A, Sismondo S, Lexchin J, Busuioc OA, Bero L, Industry sponsorship and research outcome. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2012 Dec 12;12:MR000033. doi: 10.1002/14651858.MR000033.pub2 23235689
21. STAIR. Recommendations for standards regarding preclinical neuroprotective and restorative drug development. Stroke 1999 Dec;30(12):2752–8. 10583007
22. Ludolph AC, Bendotti C, Blaugrund E, Chio A, Greensmith L, Loeffler JP, et al. Guidelines for preclinical animal research in ALS/MND: A consensus meeting. Amyotroph Lateral Scler 2010;11(1–2):38–45. doi: 10.3109/17482960903545334 20184514
23. Macleod MR, Fisher M, O'Collins V, Sena ES, Dirnagl U, Bath PM, et al. Good laboratory practice: preventing introduction of bias at the bench. Stroke 2009 Mar;40(3):e50–e52. doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.108.525386 18703798
24. Shineman DW, Basi GS, Bizon JL, Colton CA, Greenberg BD, Hollister BA, et al. Accelerating drug discovery for Alzheimer's disease: best practices for preclinical animal studies. Alzheimers Res Ther 2011 Sep 28;3(5):28. doi: 10.1186/alzrt90 21943025
25. Kilkenny C, Browne WJ, Cuthill IC, Emerson M, Altman DG, Improving Bioscience Research Reporting: The ARRIVE Guidelines for Reporting Animal Research. PLoS Biol 2010 Jun 29;8(6):e1000412. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.1000412 20613859
26. Tsilidis KK, Panagiotou OA, Sena ES, Aretouli E, Evangelou E, Howells DW, et al. Evaluation of excess significance bias in animal studies of neurological diseases. PLoS Biol 2013 Jul;11(7):e1001609. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.1001609 23874156
27. Munafo MR, Stothart G, Flint J, Bias in genetic association studies and impact factor. Mol Psychiatry 2009 Feb;14(2):119–20. doi: 10.1038/mp.2008.77 19156153
28. Macleod M.R. 2015. Data from: Risk of bias in reports of in vivo research: a focus for improvement. Dryad Digital Repository Openly available via 10.5061/dryad.cs3t8.
29. Sena ES, Currie GL, McCann SK, Macleod MR, Howells DW, Systematic reviews and meta-analysis of preclinical studies: why perform them and how to appraise them critically. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab 2014 May;34(5):737–42. doi: 10.1038/jcbfm.2014.28 24549183
30. Vesterinen HM, Sena ES, Egan KJ, Hirst TC, Churolov L, Currie GL, et al. Meta-analysis of data from animal studies: a practical guide. J Neurosci Methods 2014 Jan 15;221:92–102. doi: 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2013.09.010 Epub;%2013 Oct 4.:92–102. 24099992
31. Nagel S, Papadakis M, Chen R, Hoyte LC, Brooks KJ, Gallichan D, et al. Neuroprotection by dimethyloxalylglycine following permanent and transient focal cerebral ischemia in rats. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab 2011 Jan;31(1):132–43. doi: 10.1038/jcbfm.2010.60 20407463
32. Bara M, Joffe AR, The methodological quality of animal research in critical care: the public face of science. Ann Intensive Care 2014 Jul 29;4:26. doi: 10.1186/s13613-014-0026-8 25114829
33. Tressoldi PE, Giofre D, Sella F, Cumming G, High impact = high statistical standards? Not necessarily so. PLoS One 2013;8(2):e56180. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0056180 23418533
34. Yordanov Y, Dechartres A, Porcher R, Boutron I, Altman DG, Ravaud P, Avoidable waste of research related to inadequate methods in clinical trials. BMJ 2015 Mar 24;350:h809. doi: 10.1136/bmj.h809 25804210