Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Still to ARRIVE at adequate reporting of orthodontic studies involving animal models.
Flitti, Dihya; Pandis, Nikolaos; Seehra, Jadbinder.
Affiliation
  • Flitti D; Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Oral & Craniofacial Sciences, King's College London, Floor 21, Guy's Hospital, Guy's and St Thomas NHS Foundation Trust, London, SE1 9RT, United Kingdom.
  • Pandis N; Department of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, Dental School/Medical Faculty, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
  • Seehra J; Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Oral & Craniofacial Sciences, King's College London, Floor 21, Guy's Hospital, Guy's and St Thomas NHS Foundation Trust, London, SE1 9RT, United Kingdom.
Eur J Orthod ; 46(4)2024 Aug 01.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39007674
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

The ARRIVE 2.0 guidelines were introduced to improve the reporting of animal studies. The aim of this study was to assess the reporting adherence of orthodontic speciality animal studies in relation to ARRIVE 2.0 guidelines. Associations between the reporting and study characteristics were explored. MATERIALS AND

METHOD:

An electronic database search was undertaken using Medline via PubMed (www.pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov) to identify studies meeting the eligibility criteria published between 1 January 2018 and 31 December 2023. Data extraction was performed in duplicate and independently. Descriptive statistics and frequency distributions for the responses to each checklist item were calculated. Mean values for adequate reporting per ARRIVE item were calculated. A sum score was calculated by adding the responses (0 = not reported, 1 = inadequate reporting, 2 = adequate reporting) per item and sub-questions. On an exploratory basis, univariable linear regression between summary score and study characteristics (year of publication, continent of authorship, type of centre, and number of authors) was performed.

RESULTS:

Three hundred and eighty-four studies were analysed. Variability in the adequate reporting of the ARRIVE 2.0 guideline items was evident. In particular, in 32% of studies, there was a lack of reporting of the priori sample size calculation. Overall, the mean reporting score for the sample was 57.9 (SD 6.7 and range 34-74). There were no associations between score and study characteristics except for a weak association for year of publication with a small improvement over time (each additional year).

CONCLUSIONS:

The reporting of animal studies relevant to the speciality of orthodontics is sub-optimal in relation to the ARRIVE 2.0 guidelines. There was a tendency for the non-reporting of items pertaining to study sample size, eligibility, methods to reduce bias and interpretation/scientific implications. Greater awareness and reporting adherence to the ARRIVE 2.0 guidelines are required to reduce research waste involving animal models.
Subject(s)
Key words

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Orthodontics Limits: Animals Language: En Journal: Eur J Orthod Year: 2024 Type: Article Affiliation country: United kingdom

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Orthodontics Limits: Animals Language: En Journal: Eur J Orthod Year: 2024 Type: Article Affiliation country: United kingdom