Resources for authors of reports of randomized trials: harnessing the wisdom of authors, editors, and readers

The CONSORT Statement was developed to help authors improve the quality of reporting randomized trials. To augment the statement we published the CONSORT explanation and elaboration paper which included at least one example of good reporting for each CONSORT checklist item. We are developing a comprehensive database of examples of good reporting for each checklist item to take advantage of the breadth and variety of trials familiar to authors and readers globally. We invite authors, editors, and readers worldwide to nominate examples of well reported items for the database.     

Survey of the Quality of Experimental Design,Statistical Analysis and Reporting of Research Using Animals

For scientific, ethical and economic reasons, experiments involving animals should be appropriately designed, correctly analysed and transparently reported. This increases the scientific validity of the results, and maximises the knowledge gained from each experiment. A minimum amount of relevant information must be included in scientific publications to ensure that the methods and results of a study can be reviewed, analysed and repeated. Omitting essential information can raise scientific and ethical concerns. We report the findings of a systematic survey of reporting, experimental design and statistical analysis in published biomedical research using laboratory animals. Medline and EMBASE were searched for studies reporting research on live rats, mice and non-human primates carried out in UK and US publicly funded research establishments. Detailed information was collected from 271 publications, about the objective or hypothesis of the study, the number, sex, age and/or weight of animals used, and experimental and statistical methods. Only 59% of the studies stated the hypothesis or objective of the study and the number and characteristics of the animals used. Appropriate and efficient experimental design is a critical component of high-quality science. Most of the papers surveyed did not use randomisation (87%) or blinding (86%), to reduce bias in animal selection and outcome assessment. Only 70% of the publications that used statistical methods described their methods and presented the results with a measure of error or variability. This survey has identified a number of issues that need to be addressed in order to improve experimental design and reporting in publications describing research using animals. Scientific publication is a powerful and important source of information; the authors of scientific publications therefore have a responsibility to describe their methods and results comprehensively, accurately and transparently, and peer reviewers and journal editors share the responsibility to ensure that published studies fulfil these criteria.     

Mandated Reporting of Suspected Animal Harm by Australian Veterinarians: Community Attitudes

ABSTRACT

Research demonstrates that animal abuse is linked with various forms of interpersonal violence and that veterinarians themselves are concerned about this link. However, Australian veterinarians are not currently mandated to report cases of suspected animal abuse (AA), a position outlined by the Australian Veterinary Association under their “Animal Welfare principles and philosophy–Animal Abuse” section. A range of barriers to reporting suspected abuse cases have been identified. Barriers specifically mentioned in the AVA statement regarding the non-mandatory reporting stance were presented to a community sample of 209 participants. While 161 (77%) indicated they were aware that certain professionals were mandated to report animal abuse, notably 76% of these (n=123) indicated (incorrectly) that veterinary professionals in Australia were so mandated. Over half of the participants (n=117, 58%) indicated that “Concerns about the continued welfare of the animal victim” was, in their opinion, the most significant barrier to introducing mandatory reporting for the veterinary profession in Australia. The implications of community opinion regarding veterinarians and mandated reporting, along with acknowledgement of barriers and potential consequences of mandated reporting, are discussed.     

Comparative effectiveness research: Challenges for medical journals

Just like you would not buy a car without key information such as service history, you would not "buy" a clinical trial report without key information such as concealment of allocation. Implementation of the updated CONSORT 2010 statement enables the reader to see exactly what was done in a trial, to whom and when. A fully "CONSORTed" trial report does not necessarily mean the trial is a good one, but at least the reader can make a judgement. Clear reporting is a pre-requisite for judgement of study quality. The CONSORT statement evolves as empirical research moves on. CONSORT 2010 is even clearer than before and includes some new items with a particular emphasis on selective reporting of outcomes. The challenge is for everyone to use it.     

Effects of space allocation and housing density on measures of wellbeing in laboratory mice: a review

In the majority of countries where there are legislative requirements pertaining to the use of animals in research, figures are quoted for minimum cage sizes or space allocation to be provided per animal. These figures are generally based on professional judgement and are in common usage. However, there is a growing trend and expectation that welfare science should inform regulatory decision-making. Given the importance of the potential welfare influences of cage size on the animals themselves, this paper presents the latest scientific knowledge on this topic in one of the most commonly used animals in research, the mouse. A comprehensive review of studies in laboratory mice was undertaken, examining the effects of space allocation per animal and animal density on established welfare indicators. To date, animal density studies have predominated, and the effects of space allocation per se are still relatively unclear. This information will guide those involved in facility management or legislative review, and provide a more solid foundation for further studies into the effects of routine husbandry practices on animal welfare.     

Thirty years after Brambell: whither animal welfare science?

It has been just over 30 years since the Brambell Committee issued its clarion call for research on the welfare of animals used in agriculture. What progress has farm animal welfare science made in those 30 years, and what challenges will it face in the next 30? In this article, I discuss the ways in which the Brambell report, with its emphasis on behavioral needs and suffering, both propelled and constrained the development of animal welfare science. The role that economic factors play and the ways in which they have imposed other kinds of constraints on scientists working with farm animals are also mentioned. Despite these constraints, animal welfare science has contributed to a number of significant improvements in the welfare of farm animals. There is, however, a growing sense that animal welfare science has reached an impasse and that ethical and scientific questions about animal welfare have become hopelessly entangled. In this context, I address what I view to be the principal challenge facing farm animal welfare science, namely to move the issue of beyond suffering to an evaluation of broader quality-of-life questions and their application to improvements in welfare.     

Assessment of the Reporting Quality of Randomized Controlled Trials on the Treatment of Diabetes Mellitus with Traditional Chinese Medicine: A Systematic Review

Background

After the publication of the CONSORT 2010 statement, few studies have been conducted to assess the reporting quality of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) on treatment of diabetes mellitus with Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) published in Chinese journals.

Objective

To investigate the current situation of the reporting quality of RCTs in leading medical journals in China with the CONSORT 2010 statement as criteria.

Methods

The China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) electronic database was searched for RCTs on the treatment of diabetes mellitus with TCM published in the Journal of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Chinese Journal of Integrated Traditional & Western Medicine, and the China Journal of Chinese Materia Medica from January to December 2011. We excluded trials reported as “animal studies”, “in vitro studies”, “case studies”, or “systematic reviews”. The CONSORT checklist was applied by two independent raters to evaluate the reporting quality of all eligible trials after discussing and comprehending the items thoroughly. Each item in the checklist was graded as either “yes” or “no” depending on whether it had been reported by the authors.

Results

We identified 27 RCTs. According to the 37 items in the CONSORT checklist, the average reporting percentage was 45.0%, in which the average reporting percentage for the “title and abstract”, the “introduction”, the “methods”, the “results”, the “discussion” and the “other information” was 33.3%, 88.9%, 36.4%, 54.4%, 71.6% and 14.8%, respectively. In the Journal of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Chinese Journal of Integrated Traditional & Western Medicine, and the China Journal of Chinese Materia Medica the average reporting percentage was 42.2%, 56.8%, and 46.0%, respectively.

Conclusions

The reporting quality of RCTs in these three journals was insufficient to allow readers to assess the validity of the trials. We recommend that editors require authors to use the CONSORT statement when reporting their trial results as a condition of publication.     

The Assessment of the Quality of Reporting of Systematic Reviews/Meta-Analyses in Diagnostic Tests Published by Authors in China

Background

The quality of reporting in systematic reviews (SRs)/meta-analyses (MAs) of diagnostic tests published by authors in China has not been evaluated. The aims of present study are to evaluate the quality of reporting in diagnostic SRs/MAs using the PRISMA statement and determine the changes in the quality of reporting over time.

Methods

According to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, we searched five databases including Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and Web of knowledge, to identify SRs/MAs on diagnostic tests. The searches were conducted on July 14, 2012 and the cut off for inclusion of the SRs/MAs was December 31^st 2011. The PRISMA statement was used to assess the quality of reporting. Analysis was performed using Excel 2003, RevMan 5.

Results

A total of 312 studies were included. Fifteen diseases systems were covered. According to the PRISMA checklist, there had been serious reporting flaws in following items: structured summary (item 2, 22.4%), objectives (item 4, 18.9%), protocol and registration (item 5, 2.6%), risk of bias across studies (item 15, 26.3%), funding (item 27, 28.8%). The subgroup analysis showed that there had been some statistically significant improvement in total compliance for 9 PRISMA items after the PRISMA was released, 6 items were statistically improved regarding funded articles, 3 items were statistically improved for CSCD articles, and there was a statistically significant increase in the proportion of reviews reporting on 22 items for SCI articles (P<0.050).

Conclusion

The numbers of diagnostic SRs/MAs is increasing annually. The quality of reporting has measurably been improved over the previous years. Unfortunately, there are still many deficiencies in the reporting including protocol and registration, search, risk of bias across studies, and funding. Future Chinese reviewers should address issues on these aspects.     

Mechanical properties of animal ligaments: a review and comparative study for the identification of the most suitable human ligament surrogates

The interest in the properties of animal soft tissues is often related to the desire to find an animal model to replace human counterparts due to the unsteady availability of human tissues for experimental purposes. Once the most appropriate animal model is identified, it is possible to carry out ex-vivo and in-vivo studies for the repair of ligamentous tissues and performance testing of replacement and support healing devices. This work aims to present a systematic review of the mechanical properties of ligaments reported in the scientific literature by considering different anatomical regions in humans and several animal species. This study was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) method. Moreover, considering the lack of a standard protocol for preconditioning of tissues, this aspect is also addressed. Ninety-six studies were selected for the systematic review and analysed. The mechanical properties of different animal species are reported and summarised in tables. Only results from studies reporting the strain rate parameter were considered for comparison with human ligaments, as they were deemed more reliable. Elastic modulus, ultimate tensile stress, and ultimate strain properties are graphically reported identifying the range of values for each animal species and to facilitate comparison between values reported in the scientific literature in animal and human ligaments. Useful similarities between the mechanical properties of swine, cow, and rat and human ligaments have been found.

     

树鼩的动物福利措施探讨

树鼩在生物学特性、生理生化、新陈代谢和基因组等方面近似于人类,被广泛应用于生理学、病理学、病毒学、免疫学、药理学及遗传学等多个领域。迄今为止用于生物医学研究的树鼩大部分来自野生,实验树鼩尚无国家质量控制标准。为了保证树鼩引种、驯化、饲养、繁殖、质量控制及福利的规范化和科学化,提高树鼩繁殖率和成活率,本文从兽医公共卫生及实验动物科学的角度,对野生树鼩的捕捉、运输、检疫、饲养及繁育等方面的基本原则及技术操作和福利要求作一简述,为从事树鼩工作的有关人员及树鼩实验动物化研究提供参考。     

Survey of Canadian animal-based researchers' views on the Three Rs: replacement, reduction and refinement

The 'Three Rs' tenet (replacement, reduction, refinement) is a widely accepted cornerstone of Canadian and international policies on animal-based science. The Canadian Council on Animal Care (CCAC) initiated this web-based survey to obtain greater understanding of 'principal investigators' and 'other researchers' (i.e. graduate students, post-doctoral researchers etc.) views on the Three Rs, and to identify obstacles and opportunities for continued implementation of the Three Rs in Canada. Responses from 414 participants indicate that researchers currently do not view the goal of replacement as achievable. Researchers prefer to use enough animals to ensure quality data is obtained rather than using the minimum and potentially waste those animals if a problem occurs during the study. Many feel that they already reduce animal numbers as much as possible and have concerns that further reduction may compromise research. Most participants were ambivalent about re-use, but expressed concern that the practice could compromise experimental outcomes. In considering refinement, many researchers feel there are situations where animals should not receive pain relieving drugs because it may compromise scientific outcomes, although there was strong support for the Three Rs strategy of conducting animal welfare-related pilot studies, which were viewed as useful for both animal welfare and experimental design. Participants were not opposed to being offered "assistance" to implement the Three Rs, so long as the input is provided in a collegial manner, and from individuals who are perceived as experts. It may be useful for animal use policymakers to consider what steps are needed to make replacement a more feasible goal. In addition, initiatives that offer researchers greater practical and logistical support with Three Rs implementation may be useful. Encouragement and financial support for Three Rs initiatives may result in valuable contributions to Three Rs knowledge and improve welfare for animals used in science.     

What’s not in the news headlines or titles of Alzheimer disease articles? #InMice

There is increasing scrutiny around how science is communicated to the public. For instance, a Twitter account @justsaysinmice (with 70.4K followers in January 2021) was created to call attention to news headlines that omit that mice, not humans, are the ones for whom the study findings apply. This is the case of many headlines reporting on Alzheimer disease (AD) research. AD is characterized by a degeneration of the human brain, loss of cognition, and behavioral changes, for which no treatment is available. Around 200 rodent models have been developed to study AD, even though AD is an exclusively human condition that does not occur naturally in other species and appears impervious to reproduction in artificial animal models, an information not always disclosed. It is not known what prompts writers of news stories to either omit or acknowledge, in the story’s headlines, that the study was done in mice and not in humans. Here, we raised the hypothesis that how science is reported by scientists plays a role on the news reporting. To test this hypothesis, we investigated whether an association exists between articles’ titles and news’ headlines regarding the omission, or not, of mice. To this end, we analyzed a sample of 623 open-access scientific papers indexed in PubMed in 2018 and 2019 that used mice either as models or as the biological source for experimental studies in AD research. We found a significant association (p < 0.01) between articles’ titles and news stories’ headlines, revealing that when authors omit the species in the paper’s title, writers of news stories tend to follow suit. We also found that papers not mentioning mice in their titles are more newsworthy and significantly more tweeted than papers that do. Our study shows that science reporting may affect media reporting and asks for changes in the way we report about findings obtained with animal models used to study human diseases.

This study reveals that when scientists omit from the papers’ title that research findings were obtained using mice, as opposed to humans, the media tend to replicate the trend by omitting the use of mice from the news stories headlines that report on these papers, thereby perpetuating the misleading omission.     

Physical enrichment research for captive fish: Time to focus on the DETAILS

Growing research effort has shown that physical enrichment (PE) can improve fish welfare and research validity. However, the inclusion of PE does not always result in positive effects and conflicting findings have highlighted the many nuances involved. Effects are known to depend on species and life stage tested, but effects may also vary with differences in the specific items used as enrichment between and within studies. Reporting fine-scale characteristics of items used as enrichment in studies may help to reveal these factors. We conducted a survey of PE-focused studies published in the last 5 years to examine the current state of methodological reporting. The survey results suggest that some aspects of enrichment are not adequately detailed. For example, the amount and dimensions of objects used as enrichment were frequently omitted. Similarly, the ecological relevance, or other justification, for enrichment items was frequently not made explicit. Focusing on ecologically relevant aspects of PE and increasing the level of detail reported in studies may benefit future work and we propose a framework with the acronym DETAILS ( D imensions, E cological rationale, T iming of enrichment, A mount, I nputs, L ighting and S ocial environment). We outline the potential importance of each of the elements of this framework with the hope it may aid in the level of reporting and standardization across studies, ultimately aiding the search for more beneficial types of PE and the development of our understanding and ability to improve the welfare of captive fish and promote more biologically relevant behaviour.     

国内外高校动物福利教育发展历史与前景展望

自20世纪80年代动物福利作为一个严谨的科学分支被人们接受以来,动物福利学科得到了迅猛发展,相关概念在科学研究结果的支持下被更精确地定义,评价动物所处福利水平的体系也逐步被建立起来.伴随着动物福利科学的发展,动物福利教育也逐步被纳入高等教育的课程体系.综述了国内外高等院校特别是高校的动物医学学院近30年间的动物福利教育进程,并以英国、美国、澳大利亚等国的动物福利教育为例说明国际动物福利教育的发展现状与趋势,结合中国现状,思考中国与国际动物福利教育之间存在的差异.随着动物福利相关科学、伦理学以及法学研究的深入,社会对动物福利的关注将会日益加深,相信至少对准动物医生普及动物福利教育必将成为发展的趋势.     

Examining the Impact of Naturalistic and Unnaturalistic Environmental Enrichment on Visitor Perception of Naturalness,Animal Welfare,and Conservation

Recent research shows that using different types of enrichment has little to no impact on how zoo visitors perceive the animals or the enclosure in general. The primary objective of the current research was to examine if viewing naturalistic-looking environmental enrichment (NEE) and unnaturalistic-looking environmental enrichment (UEE) has an effect on visitor perceptions of exhibit naturalness, animal welfare, and conservation, while controlling for two factors that can influence visitor perspective: animal visibility and behavior. Study 1 examined the color of enrichment: the NEE was colored to resemble a rock and the UEE was fluorescent pink. Four conditions were recorded: Naturalistic/No Animal, Naturalistic/Animal, Unnaturalistic/No Animal, and Unnaturalistic/Animal. One video was shown to 306 randomly selected visitors who then took a survey including questions on animal welfare, exhibit naturalness, and supporting conservation organizations. Naturalistic/No Animal was perceived by visitors to be the most natural environment and the best of the exhibits for an animal to live in. Study 2 examined different types of NEE and UEE. Eight photos (four with an animal and four without) showing one out of four enrichment items (naturalistic rock, wood wool bedding, traffic cone, cardboard box) were shown to 618 randomly selected visitors who then took a survey similar to study 1. Visitors rated the photos with the NEE consistently higher for questions regarding the naturalness of the exhibit, good animal welfare, and the livability of the environment. Visitors were also asked to rank the four enrichment items from best to worst, and the NEEs were ranked significantly higher than the UEEs. While there are still many unanswered questions regarding visitor perceptions of environmental enrichment in zoos, we hope that focusing on one variant such as color and examining different types of NEE and UEE can help guide future studies on this subject.     

Life-Long Well Being: Applying Animal Welfare Science to Nonhuman Primates in Sanctuaries

Nonhuman primates have become common in sanctuaries, and a few such facilities even specialize in their care. Sanctuaries can improve the well being of many unwanted primates, especially in terms of housing and socialization. However, diverse facilities call themselves sanctuaries, and they have varying conditions, care programs, and restrictions. In addition, a general lack of regulation of sanctuaries for nonhuman animals creates problems in enforcing even minimal standards. The application of animal welfare science in the sanctuary setting can help foster high standards and empirically based decision making. Sanctuaries offer excellent environments for studying primates without the limitations inherent in breeding, exhibition, and medical research facilities. However, some sanctuaries avoid scientific study. Many sanctuaries have little opportunity to study animal welfare in a systematic manner due to financial considerations or a lack of specific expertise among staff and volunteers. Most published sanctuary research involves reintroduction procedures at sanctuaries in source countries. Nevertheless, one chimpanzee sanctuary's successes in performing long-term studies and using simple evaluation methods, such as check sheets, have demonstrated the benefits of applying animal welfare science to sanctuary-housed nonhuman primates.