TY - JOUR
T1 - The arrive guidelines 2.0
T2 - Updated guidelines for reporting animal research
AU - du Sert, Nathalie Percie
AU - Hurst, Viki
AU - Ahluwalia, Amrita
AU - Alam, Sabina
AU - Avey, Marc T.
AU - Baker, Monya
AU - Browne, William J.
AU - Clark, Alejandra
AU - Cuthill, Innes C.
AU - Dirnagl, Ulrich
AU - Emerson, Michael
AU - Garner, Paul
AU - Holgate, Stephen T.
AU - Howells, David W.
AU - Karp, Natasha A.
AU - Lazic, Stanley E.
AU - Lidster, Katie
AU - MacCallum, Catriona J.
AU - Macleod, Malcolm
AU - Pearl, Esther J.
AU - Petersen, Ole H.
AU - Rawle, Frances
AU - Reynolds, Penny
AU - Rooney, Kieron
AU - Sena, Emily S.
AU - Silberberg, Shai D.
AU - Steckler, Thomas
AU - Würbel, Hanno
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© This is an open access article, free of all copyright, and may be freely reproduced, distributed, transmitted, modified, built upon, or otherwise used by anyone for any lawful purpose. The work is made available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication.
PY - 2020/7/1
Y1 - 2020/7/1
N2 - Reproducible science requires transparent reporting. The ARRIVE guidelines (Animal Research: Reporting of In Vivo Experiments) were originally developed in 2010 to improve the reporting of animal research. They consist of a checklist of information to include in publications describing in vivo experiments to enable others to scrutinise the work adequately, evaluate its methodological rigour, and reproduce the methods and results. Despite considerable levels of endorsement by funders and journals over the years, adherence to the guidelines has been inconsistent, and the anticipated improvements in the quality of reporting in animal research publications have not been achieved. Here, we introduce ARRIVE 2.0. The guidelines have been updated and information reorganised to facilitate their use in practice. We used a Delphi exercise to prioritise and divide the items of the guidelines into 2 sets, the “ARRIVE Essential 10,” which constitutes the minimum requirement, and the “Recommended Set,” which describes the research context. This division facilitates improved reporting of animal research by supporting a stepwise approach to implementation. This helps journal editors and reviewers verify that the most important items are being reported in manuscripts. We have also developed the accompanying Explanation and Elaboration (E&E) document, which serves (1) to explain the rationale behind each item in the guidelines, (2) to clarify key concepts, and (3) to provide illustrative examples. We aim, through these changes, to help ensure that researchers, reviewers, and journal editors are better equipped to improve the rigour and transparency of the scientific process and thus reproducibility.
AB - Reproducible science requires transparent reporting. The ARRIVE guidelines (Animal Research: Reporting of In Vivo Experiments) were originally developed in 2010 to improve the reporting of animal research. They consist of a checklist of information to include in publications describing in vivo experiments to enable others to scrutinise the work adequately, evaluate its methodological rigour, and reproduce the methods and results. Despite considerable levels of endorsement by funders and journals over the years, adherence to the guidelines has been inconsistent, and the anticipated improvements in the quality of reporting in animal research publications have not been achieved. Here, we introduce ARRIVE 2.0. The guidelines have been updated and information reorganised to facilitate their use in practice. We used a Delphi exercise to prioritise and divide the items of the guidelines into 2 sets, the “ARRIVE Essential 10,” which constitutes the minimum requirement, and the “Recommended Set,” which describes the research context. This division facilitates improved reporting of animal research by supporting a stepwise approach to implementation. This helps journal editors and reviewers verify that the most important items are being reported in manuscripts. We have also developed the accompanying Explanation and Elaboration (E&E) document, which serves (1) to explain the rationale behind each item in the guidelines, (2) to clarify key concepts, and (3) to provide illustrative examples. We aim, through these changes, to help ensure that researchers, reviewers, and journal editors are better equipped to improve the rigour and transparency of the scientific process and thus reproducibility.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85087822452&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1371/journal.pbio.3000410
DO - 10.1371/journal.pbio.3000410
M3 - Article
C2 - 32663219
AN - SCOPUS:85087822452
SN - 1544-9173
VL - 18
JO - PLoS Biology
JF - PLoS Biology
IS - 7
M1 - 3000410
ER -