TY - JOUR
T1 - The ARRIVE guidelines 2.0
T2 - updated guidelines for reporting animal research
AU - Percie du Sert, Nathalie
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:
© 2020 The Authors. The Journal of Physiology © 2020 The Physiological Society
PY - 2020/9/1
Y1 - 2020/9/1
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 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 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=85087815236&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1113/JP280389
DO - 10.1113/JP280389
M3 - Editorial
C2 - 32666574
AN - SCOPUS:85087815236
SN - 0022-3751
VL - 598
SP - 3793
EP - 3801
JO - Journal of Physiology
JF - Journal of Physiology
IS - 18
ER -