Still to ARRIVE at adequate reporting of orthodontic studies involving animal models.

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.

Reporting Practices for Animal Studies on Peritoneal Dialysis Conducted in 2021-2023 after the Introduction of the ARRIVE 2.0 Guidelines.

INTRODUCTION: The first version of Animal Research: Reporting of in vivo Experiments (ARRIVE 1.0) guidelines was introduced to improve reporting of animal research but did not lead to major improvements in this respect. This applied also to animal studies on peritoneal dialysis (PD). Here, we examined the performance of the revised version of these guidelines (ARRIVE 2.0). METHODS: Eighty-nine relevant articles published in 2018-2020 (ARRIVE 1.0 period) and 97 published in 2021-2023 (ARRIVE 2.0 period) were identified in PubMed® and analyzed for completeness and transparency of reporting. RESULTS: In both periods, most studies were carried out in Asia, on rodents, and concerned the peritoneal pathophysiology. During ARRIVE 2.0, more studies were published in higher impact factor journals with the focus on pharmacology and immunology. Compared to ARRIVE 1.0, general aspects of study design and reporting improved during ARRIVE 2.0 period in studies generated in Europe and USA but did not change significantly in Asia. Detailed analysis showed no global improvement in completeness of reporting key information included in the ARRIVE 2.0 Essential 10 checklist. Articles from both periods were deficient in sample size calculations, use of blinding, recording adverse events and drop-outs, and specification of appropriate statistical methods. The level of reporting during ARRIVE 2.0 did not correspond to the journal impact factor and the presence of recommendations for the use of ARRIVE 2.0 in their instructions to authors. CONCLUSION: So far, ARRIVE 2.0 has not produced significant improvements in the reporting of animal studies in PD.

Animal Models for Investigating Osseointegration: An Overview of Implant Research over the Last Three Decades.

Dental implants and bone augmentation are among dentistry's most prevalent surgical treatments; hence, many dental implant surfaces and bone grafts have been researched to improve bone response. Such new materials were radiologically, histologically, and histomorphometrically evaluated on animals before being used on humans. As a result, several studies used animals to evaluate novel implant technologies, biocompatibility, surgical techniques, and osseointegration strategies, as preclinical research on animal models is essential to evaluate bioactive principles (on cells, compounds, and implants) that can act through multiple mechanisms and to predict animal behavior, which is difficult to predict from in vitro studies alone. In this study, we critically reviewed all research on different animal models investigating the osseointegration degree of new implant surfaces, reporting different species used in the osseointegration research over the last 30 years. Moreover, this is the first study to summarize reviews on the main animal models used in the translational research of osseointegration, including the advantages and limitations of each model and determining the ideal location for investigating osseointegration in small and large animal models. Overall, each model has advantages and disadvantages; hence, animal selection should be based on the cost of acquisition, animal care, acceptability to society, availability, tolerance to captivity, and housing convenience. Among small animal models, rabbits are an ideal model for biological observations around implants, and it is worth noting that osseointegration was discovered in the rabbit model and successfully applied to humans.

Reporting quality and risk of bias assessment of animal research on Chaihu-Shugan-San for depression: A systematic review.

Objective: Chaihu-Shugan-San (CSS) is a traditional Chinese medicine formula employed to treat depression. We aim to conduct a reporting quality assessment and risk of bias evaluation of animal research on CSS for depression. Methods: To acquire eligible studies, two reviewers searched plentiful databases from inception to October 23rd, 2021. Reporting quality assessment and risk of bias assessment of the included animal studies were evaluated by using Animal Research: Reporting In Vivo Experiments (ARRIVE) guidelines and the SYstematic Review Centre for Laboratory animal Experimentation (SYRCLE) risk of bias tool, respectively. Results: The initial search identified 720 records, while only 30 studies were included. The result of the reporting quality assessment was inferior, items 17 and 19 were not reported at all. The details of five items (items 3, 6, 7, 10, and 18) were not reported. The outcome of the risk of bias assessment suggested that half of the entries (5/10) displayed an unclear risk of bias and a high risk of bias. Blinding with regard to performance bias and detection bias revealed an unclear risk of bias (100%), followed by baseline characteristics (76.67%) and sequence generation (60%). Random outcome assessment showed a high risk of bias (100%). Conclusion: The included animal studies exhibited methodological defects and imprecise reporting. Hence, the ARRIVE guidelines and SYRCLE's RoB tool should be disseminated among basic medical researchers examining CSS for depression to publish studies with low risk of bias and sufficient reporting so that the animal research can promptly be transformed into clinical research.

A systematic review on reporting of refinement measures in mouse ECG telemetry implantation surgery.

Telemetric monitoring is used in many scientific fields, such as cardiovascular research, neurology, endocrinology, as well as animal welfare research. Nowadays, implanted electrocardiogram (ECG) radiotelemetry units are the gold standard for monitoring ECG traces, heart rate and heart rate variability in freely moving mice. Telemetry technology can be a valuable tool when studies utilize it adequately, while prioritizing animal welfare. Recently, concerns have been raised in many research fields, including animal research, regarding the reproducibility of research findings, with insufficient reporting being one of the underlying causes.A systematic review was performed by making use of three literature databases, in order to include all publications until 31.12.2019, where the surgical placing of ECG recording telemetry devices in adult mice was involved. Data extracted from the publications included selected items recommended by the ARRIVE guidelines. We focused on aspects related to the refinement of the surgery and experimental conditions that aim to improve animal welfare. In general, the quality of reporting was low in the analyzed 234 publications. Based on our analyses, we assume there has been no improvement in this field's reporting quality since 2010 when the ARRIVE guidelines on reporting were introduced. Additionally, even though expert recommendations on telemetry surgery refinement have been available since many years now, no increase in uptake (or reporting) of these measures prior (e.g., acclimatization), during (e.g., asepsis) or after (e.g., social housing) the surgery could be observed.

Reporting of anaesthesia and pain management in preclinical large animal models of articular cartilage repair - A long way to go.

Animal models continue to be used to investigate cartilage repair strategies. Adequate anaesthesia and pain management are essential in order to guarantee acceptable animal welfare as well as reproducible experimental results. This systematic review evaluates reporting of anaesthesia and pain management in surgical large animal models (horse, pig, dog, goat and sheep) of (osteo)chondral repair. Manuscripts published between 2015 and 2020 were included after a comprehensive search strategy. Data were evaluated using descriptive statistics and qualitative review. Out of 223 eligible studies, 220 studies contained incomplete information on anaesthetic and pain management. Pre-, intra- and post-operative analgesia were not mentioned in 68%, 94%, and 64% of manuscripts respectively. A total of 176 studies reported that animals underwent general anaesthesia during surgery. Surprisingly, 30% of these articles did not provide any detail on anaesthetic management, while 37% reported using inhalant, hypnotic or sedative drugs only, without mention of analgesics. Pain monitoring was not reported in 87% of manuscripts. The vast majority of preclinical large animal studies on cartilage repair did not meet veterinary clinical standards for anaesthesia and analgesia, and failed to report according to the ARRIVE international guidelines. In light of serious welfare, ethical and translational validity concerns, improvement is urgently needed.

Dog as the experimental model: Laboratory uses of dogs in the United States.

Dogs are the experimental model in many types of biomedical research. Each year, hundreds of publications report the use of dogs in invasive biomedical procedures, often without sufficient explanation of the purpose and justification for selecting dog as the experimental model. The European Union requires detailed reporting of animal use that includes research purpose, but animal use reporting in the United States, overseen by the USDA, does not require this information. The ability to replace dogs with alternative models begins by understanding how they are used. Therefore, this study was undertaken to investigate the types of invasive biomedical procedures that dogs are subjected to in US laboratories. Well-defined sets of research publications and grants were accessed to obtain information on the types of biomedical research using dogs. USDA databases provided additional information. An ontology to categorize biomedical research uses of dogs identified the most common as translational studies for cardiovascular, cancer, nervous/mental, and mus-culoskeletal disorders. Information typically reported for experimental animals was sometimes missing or incomplete in publications, including the number, source, fate, species justification, and pain management of dogs, suggesting that many journals have not adopted the ARRIVE guidelines on animal use reporting. It was not possible to identify the research purpose for all dogs used by US institutions because (a) not all dog use is published and (b) animal research purpose is not required reporting in the US. These findings should be informative to future initiatives to replace, reduce, and refine the use of dogs in research.

Adapting to Changes in Publishing When Searching for Alternatives and Reporting on Animal Research: A Librarian's Perspective.

Since the inaugural issue of ATLA, many changes within publishing have occurred, impacting when, where, and how researchers conduct literature searches for non-animal alternatives. Such changes include increased rate of growth in scientific publications, greater number of databases and online resources available to search, opportunities for open and almost immediate dissemination of research outputs such as preprints and method protocols, and the development of reporting guidelines for animal research. Here we offer a librarian's perspective on these changes and advice on how to manage them to enable robust and diverse alternatives to be implemented in future research.

Inadequate awareness of adherence to ARRIVE guidelines, regarding reporting quality of hernia models repaired with meshes: a systematic review.

PURPOSE: Research papers involving animal studies often display poor reporting standards, leading to lower study reproducibility. We aim to determine the difference in reporting animal studies regarding abdominal wall hernia repair with mesh placement, before and after the publication of ARRIVE-2010 (Animal Research: Reporting of In Vivo Experiments) guidelines. Furthermore, we aim to present the most up-to-date reporting quality using the updated ARRIVE-2020 as criteria. METHODS: All animal studies concerning hernia repair with meshes were systematically searched. Articles published in the 5 years leading up to the ARRIVE-2010 (pre-ARRIVE) and articles within the last 5 years until the updated ARRIVE 2.0 (post-ARRIVE) were compared for overall species and specific species separately. Articles published last year were evaluated for presenting fully reported (sub)items. RESULTS: The number of fully reported (sub)items per article was on average significantly higher for pre-ARRIVE than post-ARRIVE for overall species (mean (SD) = 14.0 (2.8) vs. 12.6 (2.5), P < 0.001). The same applies to rabbit (mean (SD) = 14.8 (2.6) vs. 12.6 (2.6), P = 0.001) and pig studies (mean (SD) = 14.5 (2.7) vs. 11.6 (2.6), P = 0.004), with no significance in rat studies (mean (SD) = 13.6 (2.9) vs. 12.9 (2.3), P = 0.076). Significance was found in several (sub)items between pre-ARRIVE and post-ARRIVE (n = 7, 3, 8, and 3 for overall species, rat, rabbit, and pig studies, respectively). CONCLUSION: General reporting quality of animal experiments has been improved markedly by ARRIVE guidelines. However, more improvements are required considering the arrival of ARRIVE 2.0 guidelines.

The Quality of Reporting Raises Questions on the Experimental Validity of Animal Studies Conducted in India and Sri Lanka: Preliminary Analysis of a Systematic Survey.

The quality of animal experiments in terms of appropriate reporting is a concern, particularly with regard to their validity and the recording of the measures taken to reduce various types of bias. A systematic survey of 1371 and 236 publications from India and Sri Lanka, respectively, which were published between 1905 and 2017 and indexed in NCBI-PubMed, Cinhal, MEDLINE and Scopus, was carried out. The level of detail in the descriptions of animals used and the measures taken to reduce bias were analysed in each article. Selected parameters from the Animal Research: Reporting of In Vivo Experiments (ARRIVE) guidelines, such as age, weight, sex, sample size calculation, blinding and randomisation were considered. The findings revealed poor reporting standards in animal experiments carried out in India and Sri Lanka, confirming the limited impact of the ARRIVE guidelines. These findings emphasise the urgent need for improvements in the peer review process, both prior to a study being set up and in the post-study reporting phase, and for more stringent adherence to the ARRIVE guidelines in the reporting of animal experiments.

Quality of design and reporting of animal research in peritoneal dialysis: A scoping review.

The concerns about reproducibility and validity of animal studies are partly related to poor experimental design and reporting. Here, we undertook a scoping review of the literature to determine the extent and quality of reporting of animal studies on peritoneal dialysis (PD). Online databases were searched to identify 567 relevant original articles published between 1979 and 2018. These were analyzed with respect to bibliographic parameters and general aspects of animal experimentation. A subgroup of 120 studies was analyzed in detail in terms of the impact on the reporting quality of the Animal Research: Reporting of In Vivo Experiments (ARRIVE) guidelines for animal studies. The number of animal studies on PD increased continuously over the years with a thematic shift toward long-term preservation of the peritoneum as a dialyzing organ. There were significant deficiencies in research design with the lack of sample size estimation, randomization, and blinding being the commonest shortcomings. The description of animal numbers, housing conditions, use of medication, and statistical analysis was incomplete. The introduction in 2010 of the ARRIVE guidelines produced very little improvement in the completeness of reporting regardless of journal impact factor. The animal studies on PD suffer from deficits in experimental protocols and transparent reporting. These drawbacks need to be corrected to ensure high-quality and much-needed animal research in PD.

Quality of Adherence to the ARRIVE Guidelines in the Material and Methods Section in Studies Where Swine Were Used as Surgical Biomodels: A Systematic Review (2013-2018).

Over the last two decades, pigs have become animal biomodels widely used for the investigation and practice of surgical techniques because of their great physiological and anatomical similarities to humans. Even though many of these studies must be carried out later in humans, the description of basic information is limited, making exact repetitions of the reported experimental methods impossible. In this review, 108 studies from 2013 to 2018 were considered to determine the quality of adherence to the ARRIVE guidelines in the reports of the methodologies. The majority of the studies lacked the details recommended in the ARRIVE guidelines regarding data directly related to the welfare of animals undergoing surgery and those about anesthetic protocols and analgesics. Information related to sample size calculation and housing and husbandry conditions was also very limited. We believe that the ARRIVE guidelines are an excellent tool for good-quality reporting. We encourage scientists to consistently use them as a tool to improve the quality of their scientific reports and, consequently, ensure animal welfare.

Endorsement of Animal Research: Incorporation of In Vivo Experiments (ARRIVE) Guidelines/Gold Standard Publication Checklist (GSPC) by Chinese journals: A survey of journals' instructions for authors and editors.

The objective was to determine the rate at which Chinese journals include Animal Research: Reporting of In Vivo Experiments (ARRIVE) Guidelines/Gold Standard Publication Checklist (GSPC) in their instructions for authors, and the awareness and recognition of editors. The survey was performed on Chinese journals. The most recent versions each journal's instructions for authors were downloaded, and the information related to the ARRIVE/GSPC was collected. A self-developed questionnaire was used to conduct the survey among the editors. Questionnaires were sent to 238 qualified journals and 198 of them returned them, achieving an 83.2% response rate. The results showed that none of the journals included the ARRIVE/GSPC in their instructions for authors, and the awareness rate was only 13.1% (26/198). The participants who were unaware of the ARRIVE/GSPC were less likely than those who were aware of them to believe it was necessary to include the ARRIVE/GSPC in the instructions for authors (23.3% vs. 61.5%), and less likely to request authors in their manuscript preparation (28.5% vs. 88.5%), editors in the editing and processing (28.5% vs. 84.6%) and reviewers in peer review stage (28.5% vs. 92.3%) to follow the ARRIVE/GSPC. Currently no Chinese journals include the ARRIVE/GSPC in their instructions for authors. The recognition rate of the ARRIVE/GSPC was low among the editors. So, we suggest that Chinese journals should promote inclusion of the ARRIVE/GSPC in journals' instructions for authors. It is also important to educate researchers and editors alike to increase their understanding of the ARRIVE/GSPC, so that the quality of reporting of animal study can be improved.

The reporting quality of acupuncture for neurogenesis in experimental ischemic stroke study.

BACKGROUND: There is increasing evidence demonstrating the highly inadequate reporting of preclinical research in multiple scientific publications. The purpose of this study is to systematically investigate the reporting quality of acupuncture for neurogenesis in animal models of acute ischemic stroke. METHODS: We searched eight databases, including PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, AMED, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure, VIP information database, Wanfang data Information Site, and Chinese Biomedical Literature Database. The methodological quality of included studies was assessed by using the CAMARADES 10-item checklist. The STRICTA statement was modified to gear to animal acupuncture research. The reporting quality was assessed according to the ARRIVE guidelines and the modified STRICTA statement. Data were analyzed with descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Ultimately, 44 studies containing 2,411 subjects were identified. The overall compliance with the CAMARADES 10-item checklist has a mean of 4.3. The reporting quality indicated that the overall compliance with ARRIVE guidelines has a mean of 59.9% and with the modified STRICTA statement a mean of 71.8%. The findings suggest that the reporting quality of acupuncture for preclinical stroke was generally poor. CONCLUSIONS: Full compliance with ARRIVE guidelines and/or modified STRICTA statement in designing, conducting and reporting preclinical acupuncture research is urgently needed in the future.

Systematic Review on Characteristics and Reporting Quality of Animal Studies in Liver Regeneration Triggered by Portal Vein Occlusion and Associating Liver Partition and Portal Vein Ligation for Staged Hepatectomy: Adherence to the ARRIVE Guidelines.

BACKGROUND: Portal vein occlusion and associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy techniques are in the spotlight of oncological liver surgery. Research involving animal models is indispensable to study the mechanisms of liver regeneration. Inaccurate reporting acts as a significant barrier during the correct interpretation of preclinical findings. Hence, we performed a systematic review to evaluate the status quo of the reporting standards and to assess the potential factors influencing reporting in animal studies, which are focusing on portal vein occlusion and/or associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy techniques. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic review was performed in the PubMed and Ovid MEDLINE databases. Baseline study characteristics were recorded, and quality assessment was performed using the Animals in Research: Reporting in vivo Experiments (ARRIVE) checklist. RESULTS: A total of 107 research articles were included for the comprehensive assessment. In the subgroup analysis, newer reports and studies from the post-ARRIVE era, and reports from Europe were all associated with significantly higher ARRIVE scores (P < 0.05). Univariable regression analysis confirmed these factors as predictors of higher reporting quality. However, in the multivariable analysis, only publishing in the post-ARRIVE era has been found as single independent predictor of higher reporting standards (P = 0.028 post-ARRIVE total score 75th percentile; P = 0.000 post-ARRIVE total score median). CONCLUSIONS: Although an improving trend has been observed in reporting quality over the past years, this effect was clearly insufficient. Our results emphasize the need for further measures to improve the methodical quality at all levels of planning, execution, and reporting of preclinical studies in liver regeneration research.

Ecological fallacy as a novel risk factor for poor translation in neuroscience research: A systematic review and simulation study.

BACKGROUND: Translational neuroscience is largely concerned with establishing causal links between biological processes and functional outcomes. Exciting new methods have emerged and top-tier biomedical journals are placing increasingly high demand for experiments that link outcomes. One pitfall to making these connections is the "ecological fallacy"-establishing a relationship between outcomes based on aggregate (averaged) results (a distinct issue from correlation vs causation). METHODS: To showcase the ecological fallacy, we first used simulated data to define and demonstrate the problem. Next, we performed a systematic review to determine the prevalence of the fallacy in top-tier biomedical journals (Science, Nature Medicine, Neuron, Nature, Nature Neuroscience, Cell). Based on our own research interests and specializations, we specifically focused on recent publications in the area of spinal cord injury and regenerative medicine. RESULTS: Of the articles reviewed which examined a relationship between central nervous system regeneration and a behavioural outcome, 100% (21/21) were subject to possible ecological fallacy. CONCLUSIONS: Ecological fallacy is highly prevalent in neuroscience research and could partially account for translation failures in this field. Reporting guidelines for in vivo experiments should include subject-level correlation analyses for the primary outcomes.

Body temperature and mouse scoring systems as surrogate markers of death in cecal ligation and puncture sepsis.

BACKGROUND: Despite increasing ethical standards for conducting animal research, death is still often used as an endpoint in mouse sepsis studies. Recently, the Murine Sepsis Score (MSS), Mouse Clinical Assessment Score for Sepsis (M-CASS), and Mouse Grimace Scale (MGS) were developed as surrogate endpoint scoring systems for assessing pain and disease severity in mice. The objective of our study was to compare the effectiveness of these scoring systems and monitoring of body temperature for predicting disease progression and death in the cecal ligation and puncture (CLP) sepsis model, in order to better inform selection of surrogate endpoints for death in experimental sepsis. METHODS: C57Bl/6J mice were subjected to control sham surgery, or moderate or severe CLP sepsis. All mice were monitored every 4 h for surrogate markers of death using modified versions of the MSS, M-CASS, and MGS scoring systems until 24 h post-operatively, or until endpoint (inability to ambulate) and consequent euthanasia. RESULTS: Thirty percent of mice subjected to moderate severity CLP reached endpoint by 24 h post-CLP, whereas 100% undergoing severe CLP reached endpoint within 20 h. Modified MSS, M-CASS, and MGS scores all increased, while body temperature decreased, in a time-dependent and sepsis severity-dependent manner, although modified M-CASS scores showed substantial variability. Receiver operating characteristic curves demonstrate that the last recorded body temperature (AUC = 0.88; 95% CI 0.77-0.99), change in body temperature (AUC = 0.89; 95% CI 0.78-0.99), modified M-CASS (AUC = 0.93; 95% CI 0.85-1.00), and modified MSS (AUC = 0.95; 95% CI 0.88-1.01) scores are all robust for predicting death in CLP sepsis, whereas modified MGS (AUC = 0.78; 95% CI 0.63-0.92) is less robust. CONCLUSIONS: The modified MSS and body temperature are effective markers for assessing disease severity and predicting death in the CLP model, and should thus be considered as valid surrogate markers to replace death as an endpoint in mouse CLP sepsis studies.

Bone grafting materials in critical defects in rabbit calvariae. A systematic review and quality evaluation using ARRIVE guidelines.

AIMS: To perform a systematic literature review of the regenerative potential of bone substitutes used to fill critical size defects (CSDs) in rabbit calvariae; to determine the quality of the included studies using ARRIVE guidelines. MATERIAL AND METHODS: An Internet search was performed in duplicate using MEDLINE, PubMed and Google Scholar databases (without restrictions on publication date) for studies reporting the regenerative potential of bone substitutes in CSDs in rabbit calvariae. Four parameters were analyzed by histomorphometry: new bone formation (NB); defect closure (DC); residual graft (RG); and connective tissue (CT). Animal Research Reporting in In Vivo Experiments (ARRIVE) guidelines (a list of 20 aspects for scoring texts and ensuring comparison between different experimental studies in animals) were used to evaluate the quality of the selected works. RESULTS: Twenty-one manuscripts were included. CSDs with 15 mm were predominant (57.14%). Only one study described the four histomorphometric parameters. NB formation was analyzed in 15 studies (71.42%) and was higher for particulate autogenous bone grafts (range 52.1-82%) after 12 weeks. DC was evaluated in six studies (28.57%) and was higher for fragmented adipose tissue grafts (range 53.33-93.33%) after 12 weeks. RG was evaluated in four studies (19.04%) and was higher for hydroxyapatite/beta-tricalcium phosphate grafts with silica (HA/ß-TCP + Si) (range 35.78-47.54%) at 12 weeks. CT was evaluated in two studies (9.5%) and was higher for HA/ß-TCP + membrane (44.2%) at 12 weeks. Quality evaluation identified three items (title, introduction/objectives and experimental procedure) (15%) with excellent scores, 10 items (abstract, introduction/background, methods/ethical statement, experimental animals, experimental outcomes, statistics, results/baseline data, outcome/estimation and discussion interpretation/scientific implications) (50%) with average scores, and seven items (housing and husbandry, sample size, allocation, numbers analyzed, adverse effects, general applicability/relevance and funding) (35%) obtained poor scores. Only one manuscript obtained a quality evaluation considered as excellent. CONCLUSIONS: Autogenous bone grafts increase NB. DC is enhanced by the use of fragmented adipose tissue. RG remains in the defect for longer when hydroxyapatite/beta-tricalcium phosphate with silica is used, and more CT can be expected when hydroxyapatite/beta-tricalcium phosphate with silica grafts are covered by a membrane. The addition of stem cells of different origins to grafting materials enhances bone formation in early healing periods. The ARRIVE guidelines are still insufficiently used and the overall quality of studies remains low.

Transparency in the reporting of in vivo pre-clinical pain research: The relevance and implications of the ARRIVE (Animal Research: Reporting In Vivo Experiments) guidelines.

Clear reporting of research is crucial to the scientific process. Poorly designed and reported studies are damaging not only to the efforts of individual researchers, but also to science as a whole. Standardised reporting methods, such as those already established for reporting randomised clinical trials, have led to improved study design and facilitated the processes of clinical systematic review and meta-analysis. Such standards were lacking in the pre-clinical field until the development of the ARRIVE (Animal Research: Reporting In Vivo Experiments) guidelines. These were prompted following a survey which highlighted a widespread lack of robust and consistent reporting of pre-clinical in vivo research, with reports frequently omitting basic information required for study replication and quality assessment. The resulting twenty item checklist in ARRIVE covers all aspects of experimental design with particular emphasis on bias reduction and methodological transparency. Influential publishers and research funders have already adopted ARRIVE. Further dissemination and acknowledgement of the importance of these guidelines is vital to their widespread implementation. Conclusions and implications Wide implementation of the ARRIVE guidelines for reporting of in vivo preclinical research, especially pain research, are essential for a much needed increased transparency and quality in publishing such research. ARRIVE will also positively influence improvements in experimental design and quality, assist the conduct of accurate replication studies of important new findings and facilitate meta-analyses of preclinical research.