ObjectiveTo investigate the awareness situation on the ARRIVE guideline and the Gold Standard Publication Checklist (GSPC) of animal experiments in researchers in animal experiments field in Lanzhou city, in order to improve the promotion of the two reporting guidelines in China. MethodsA self-designed questionnaire was used to investigate the clinical graduate students and teachers in medical college in Lanzhou city. The investigation contents mainly included the basic information of the respondents, the awareness situation on the ARRIVE guideline, GSPC and other medical reporting guidelines. SPSS 21.0 software was used for data analysis. ResultsA total of 329 questionnaires (40 were from teachers and 289 were from graduate students) were issued, of which, 287 questionnaires were effective. The results showed that the awareness rate on the ARRIVE guideline and GSPC in clinical graduate students and teachers in medical college in Lanzhou city were 11.8% and 12.5%, respectively, and there was no significant difference between students and teachers in awareness rate (P=0.903). The survey approaches, the age, education, job, and the organization of the respondents were all not the influence factors of awareness rate (P>0.05). The respondents knew about the reporting guidelines mainly through the website (33.4%), related studies (21.2%) and academic reports (17.4%). ConclusionThe awareness rate on the ARRIVE guideline and GSPC is relative low in researchers in animal experiments field in Lanzhou city, and it needed to take purposeful measures to promote and popularize them.
ObjectiveTo assess the endorsement of the ARRIVE guideline and the Gold Standard Publication Checklist (GSPC) by Chinese journals in animal experiments field and its incorporation into their editorial processes. MethodsChinese journals indexed by SCI, MEDLINE, CSCD or CSTPCD were included. The latest'instruction for authors' (IFA) of each included journals was downloaded and any text mentioning the ARRIVE guideline and GSPC was extracted. Subsequently, a self-designed questionnaire was used to investigate the editor of each included journals. The investigation contents mainly included the basic information of the respondents, the awareness situation on the ARRIVE guideline, GSPC and their incorporation into editorial and peer review processes. Results240 journals in animal experiments field from China were examined. A total of 240 questionnaires were issued, of which, 198 questionnaires were effective (response rate 82.5%). The results showed that all IFAs didn't mention the ARRIVE guideline or GSPC and the awareness rate on the ARRIVE guideline and GSPC in editors of Chinese journals was only 13.1%. Only 10.1% of the editors reported that they required authors to comply with the ARRIVE guideline and GSPC. And editors reported that they incorporated the two guidelines into their peer review (7.1%) and editorial processes (8.1%). ConclusionAt present, all Chinese journals'IFAs didn't mention the ARRIVE guideline or GSPC. The majority of editors surveyed are not familiar with the content of the ARRIVE guideline and GSPC. And it needs to take purposeful measures to promote and popularize them in order to improve the quality of animal experiment reports.
ObjectivesUsing the ARRIVE guidelines (Animal Research Reporting: In Vivo Experiments Guidelines) to carry out a retrospective study of the reporting quality of animal studies published in Chinese journals.MethodsWe searched databases including CNKI, WanFang Data, VIP and CBM to July, 2018. Four reviewers independently screened literatures and extracted data. The ARRIVE guidelines were used to assess reporting quality and the comparative analysis based on different published time.ResultsA total of 4 342 studies were included. About the cited frequency, 73.03% studies were ≤5, and merely 29.04% studies were published in journals of CSCD. The assessment results showed that the number of reported items with "low risk" in the ARRIVE guidelines, which have 20 items, that meaning 39 sub items, more than half of sub items (51.28%, 20/39) rated as "low risk" had a compliance rate of less than 50%. Among them, 65.00% (13/20) of sub items had a lower rate of compliance with "low risk" than 10%.ConclusionThe reporting quality of domestic animal studies is generally low. The coincidence rate of domestic animal studies has been improved to some extent in most of items after the ARRIVE guidelines published, however, some items of methodology, results and conclusions had problems with insufficient reporting. Therefore, we suggest that it is necessary to popularize the ARRIVE guidelines, advocate more researchers following the ARRIVE guidelines and promote endorsement of the ARRIVE Guideline by Chinese Journals to improve the design, implementation and reporting of animal experiments, and ultimately enhance the quality of animal studies.