The ARRIVE guidelines 2.0: Updated guidelines for reporting animal research*

Abstract

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.

References 59

1. 1.

   Goodman SN Fanelli D Ioannidis JPA. What does research reproducibility mean?Science translational medicine2016; 8(341): 341ps12. doi: 10.1126/scitranslmed.aaf5027.

   Not in our library10.1126/scitranslmed.aaf5027

2. 2.

   Begley CG Ioannidis JP. Reproducibility in science: improving the standard for basic and preclinical research.Circ Res2015; 116(1): 116–126. Epub 2015/01/02. doi: 10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.114.303819. PubMed PMID: 25552691.

   Not in our library10.1161/circresaha.114.303819

3. 3.

   Freedman LP Venugopalan G Wisman R. Reproducibility2020: Progress and priorities.F1000Research2017; 6: 604. Epub 2017/06/18. doi: 10.12688/f1000research.11334.1. PubMed PMID: 28620458; PubMed Central PMCID: PMCPMC5461896.

   Not in our library10.12688/f1000research.11334.1

4. 4.
   Badges to Acknowledge Open Practices: A Simple, Low-Cost, Effective Method for Increasing Transparency · 2016

   No notice
5. 5.

   Else H. Radical open-access plan could spell end to journal subscriptions.Nature2018; 561(7721): 17–18. Epub 2018/09/06. doi: 10.1038/d41586-018-06178-7. PubMed PMID: 30181639.

   Not in our library10.1038/d41586-018-06178-7

6. 6.

   Nosek BA Ebersole CR DeHaven AC Mellor DT. The preregistration revolution.Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A2018; 115(11): 2600–2606. Epub 2018/03/14. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1708274114. PubMed PMID: 29531091; PubMed Central PMCID: PMCPMC5856500.

   Not in our library10.1073/pnas.1708274114

7. 7.

   Chambers CD Forstmann B Pruszynski JA. Registered reports at the European Journal of Neuroscience: consolidating and extending peer-reviewed study pre-registration.Eur J Neurosci2017; 45(5): 627–628. Epub 2016/12/28. doi: 10.1111/ejn.13519. PubMed PMID: 28027598.

   Not in our library10.1111/ejn.13519

8. 8.

   Bate ST Clark RA. The design and statistical analysis of animal experimentsCambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press; 2014. 310 p.

   Not in our library

9. 9.
   The Experimental Design Assistant. · 2017

   Not checked
10. 10.

    Lazic SE. Experimental design for laboratory biologists: maximising information and improving reproducibilityCambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2016.

    Not in our library

11. 11.
    Risk of Bias in Reports of In Vivo Research: A Focus for Improvement · 2015

    Corrected
12. 12.

    Macleod MR Fisher M O'Collins V Sena ES Dirnagl U Bath PM, et al. Good laboratory practice: preventing introduction of bias at the bench.Stroke2009; 40(3): e50-2. Epub 2008/08/16. doi: STROKEAHA.108.525386 [pii] 10.1161/STROKEAHA.108.525386. PubMed PMID: 18703798.

    Not in our library10.1161/strokeaha.108.525386

13. 13.

    Rice AS Cimino-Brown D Eisenach JC Kontinen VK Lacroix-Fralish ML Machin I, et al. Animal models and the prediction of efficacy in clinical trials of analgesic drugs: a critical appraisal and call for uniform reporting standards.Pain2009; 139(2): 243–247. Epub 2008/09/26. doi: S0304-3959(08)00508-3 [pii] 10.1016/j.pain.2008.08.017. PubMed PMID: 18814968.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.pain.2008.08.017

14. 14.

    McCance I. Assessment of statistical procedures used in papers in the Australian Veterinary Journal.Aust Vet J1995; 72(9): 322–328. Epub 1995/09/01. PubMed PMID: 8585846.

    Not in our library10.1111/j.1751-0813.1995.tb07534.x

15. 15.

    Hackam DG Redelmeier DA. Translation of research evidence from animals to humans.JAMA2006; 296(14): 1731–1732. Epub 2006/10/13. doi: 10.1001/jama.296.14.1731. PubMed PMID: 17032985.

    Not in our library10.1001/jama.296.14.1731

16. 16.
    Survey of the Quality of Experimental Design, Statistical Analysis and Reporting of Research Using Animals · 2009

    No notice
17. 17.
    Can Animal Models of Disease Reliably Inform Human Studies? · 2010

    No notice
18. 18.

    Glasziou P Altman DG Bossuyt P Boutron I Clarke M Julious S, et al. Reducing waste from incomplete or unusable reports of biomedical research. Lancet2014; 383(9913): 267–276. Epub 2014/01/15. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(13)62228-X. PubMed PMID: 24411647.

    Not in our library10.1016/s0140-6736(13)62228-x

19. 19.

    Begley CG Ellis LM. Drug development: raise standards for preclinical cancer research.Nature2012; 483(7391): 531–533. Epub 2012/03/31. doi: 10.1038/483531a. PubMed PMID: 22460880.

    Not in our library10.1038/483531a

20. 20.

    Scott S Kranz JE Cole J Lincecum JM Thompson K Kelly N, et al. Design, power, and interpretation of studies in the standard murine model of ALS.Amyotroph Lateral Scler2008; 9(1): 4–15. Epub 2008/02/15. doi: 789666722 [pii] 10.1080/17482960701856300. PubMed PMID: 18273714.

    Not in our library10.1080/17482960701856300

21. 21.

    Kilkenny C Altman DG. Improving bioscience research reporting: ARRIVE-ing at a solution.Lab Anim2010; 44(4): 377–378. Epub 2010/07/28. doi: la.2010.0010021 [pii] 10.1258/la.2010.0010021. PubMed PMID: 20660161.

    Not in our library10.1258/la.2010.0010021

22. 22.

    Kilkenny C Browne W Cuthill IC Emerson M Altman DG. Animal research: reporting in vivo experiments: the ARRIVE guidelines.J Gene Med2010; 12(7): 561–563. Epub 2010/07/08. doi: 10.1002/jgm.1473. PubMed PMID: 20607692.

    Not in our library10.1002/jgm.1473

23. 23.
    Improving Bioscience Research Reporting: The ARRIVE Guidelines for Reporting Animal Research · 2010

    No notice
24. 24.

    Kilkenny C Browne WJ Cuthill IC Emerson M Altman DG. Animal Research: Reporting In Vivo Experiments: the ARRIVE guidelines. J Physiol2010; 588(Pt 14): 2519–2521. Epub 2010/07/17. doi: 588/14/2519 [pii] 10.1113/jphysiol.2010.192278. PubMed PMID: 20634180; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC2916981.

    Not in our library10.1113/jphysiol.2010.192278

25. 25.

    Kilkenny C Browne WJ Cuthill IC Emerson M Altman DG. Animal Research: Reporting In Vivo Experiments: the ARRIVE guidelines. Exp Physiol2010; 95(8): 842–844. Epub 2010/07/09. doi: 95/8/842 [pii] 10.1113/expphysiol.2010.053793. PubMed PMID: 20610776.

    Not in our library10.1113/expphysiol.2010.053793

26. 26.

    McGrath JC Drummond GB McLachlan EM Kilkenny C Wainwright CL. Guidelines for reporting experiments involving animals: the ARRIVE guidelines.Br J Pharmacol2010; 160(7): 1573–1576. Epub 2010/07/24. doi: BPH873 [pii] 10.1111/j.1476-5381.2010.00873.x. PubMed PMID: 20649560; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC2936829.

    Not in our library10.1111/j.1476-5381.2010.00873.x

27. 27.

    Kilkenny C Browne W Cuthill IC Emerson M Altman DG. Animal Research: Reporting In Vivo Experiments-the ARRIVE Guidelines. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 2011. Epub 2011/01/06. doi: jcbfm2010220 [pii] 10.1038/jcbfm.2010.220. PubMed PMID: 21206507.

    Not in our library10.1038/jcbfm.2010.220

28. 28.

    Kilkenny C Browne WJ Cuthill IC Emerson M Altman DG. Improving bioscience research reporting: the ARRIVE guidelines for reporting animal research.Vet Clin Pathol2012; 41(1): 27–31. Epub 2012/03/07. doi: 10.1111/j.1939-165X.2012.00418.x. PubMed PMID: 22390425.

    Not in our library10.1111/j.1939-165x.2012.00418.x

29. 29.

    Kilkenny C Browne WJ Cuthill IC Emerson M Altman DG. Improving bioscience research reporting: the ARRIVE guidelines for reporting animal research.Osteoarthritis Cartilage2012; 20(4): 256–260. doi: 10.1111/j.1939-165X.2012.00418.x.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.joca.2012.02.010

30. 30.
    Improving bioscience research reporting: The ARRIVE guidelines for reporting animal research · 2010

    No notice
31. 31.

    Avey MT Moher D Sullivan KJ Fergusson D Griffin G Grimshaw JM, et al. The Devil Is in the Details: Incomplete Reporting in Preclinical Animal Research.PLoS ONE2016; 11(11): e0166733. Epub 2016/11/18. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0166733. PubMed PMID: 27855228; PubMed Central PMCID: PMCPMC5113978.

    Not in our library10.1371/journal.pone.0166733

32. 32.
    ARRIVE has not ARRIVEd: Support for the ARRIVE (Animal Research: Reporting of in vivo Experiments) guidelines does not improve the reporting quality of papers in animal welfare, analgesia or anesthesia · 2018

    No notice
33. 33.
    A randomised controlled trial of an Intervention to Improve Compliance with the ARRIVE guidelines (IICARus) · 2019

    No notice
34. 34.

    The NPQIP Collaborative group. Did a change in Nature journals’ editorial policy for life sciences research improve reporting? BMJ Open Science. 2019; 3(1):e000035. doi: 10.1136/bmjos-2017-000035.

    Not in our library10.1136/bmjos-2017-000035

35. 35.

    Han S Olonisakin TF Pribis JP Zupetic J Yoon JH Holleran KM, et al. A checklist is associated with increased quality of reporting preclinical biomedical research: a systematic review.PLoS ONE2017; 12(9): e0183591. Epub 2017/09/14. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0183591. PubMed PMID: 28902887; PubMed Central PMCID: PMCPMC5597130.

    Not in our library10.1371/journal.pone.0183591

36. 36.

    Ramirez FD Motazedian P Jung RG Di Santo P MacDonald ZD Moreland R, et al. Methodological rigor in preclinical cardiovascular studies: targets to enhance reproducibility and promote research translation.Circ Res2017; 120(12): 1916–1926. Epub 2017/04/05. doi: 10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.117.310628. PubMed PMID: 28373349; PubMed Central PMCID: PMCPMC5466021.

    Not in our library10.1161/circresaha.117.310628

37. 37.

    Reichlin TS Vogt L Wurbel H. The Researchers' View of Scientific Rigor-Survey on the Conduct and Reporting of In Vivo Research.PLoS ONE2016; 11(12): e0165999. Epub 2016/12/03. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0165999. PubMed PMID: 27911901; PubMed Central PMCID: PMCPMC5135049.

    Not in our library10.1371/journal.pone.0165999

38. 38.

    Hurst V Percie du Sert N. The ARRIVE guidelines survey.Open Science Framework2017. doi: 10.17605/OSF.IO/G8T5Q.

    Not in our library

39. 39.
    Questionable research practices in ecology and evolution · 2018

    No notice
40. 40.

    The Academy of Medical Sciences. Reproducibility and reliability of biomedical research: improving research practice 2015. Available from: https://acmedsci.ac.uk/policy/policy-projects/reproducibility-and-reliability-of-biomedical-research. [cited 16 June 2020].

    Not in our library

41. 41.

    Sena ES Currie GL. How our approaches to assessing benefits and harms can be improved. Animal Welfare2019; 28(1): 107–115. doi: 10.7120/09627286.28.1.107. PubMed PMID: WOS:000455904200011.

    Not in our library

42. 42.
    Reporting animal research: Explanation and elaboration for the ARRIVE guidelines 2.0 · 2020

    No notice
43. 43.

    Landis SC Amara SG Asadullah K Austin CP Blumenstein R Bradley EW, et al. A call for transparent reporting to optimize the predictive value of preclinical research. Nature2012; 490(7419): 187–191. Epub 2012/10/13. doi: 10.1038/nature11556. PubMed PMID: 23060188; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC3511845.

    Not in our library10.1038/nature11556

44. 44.

    Kimmelman J Anderson JA. Should preclinical studies be registered?Nature biotechnology2012; 30(6): 488–489. Epub 2012/06/09. doi: 10.1038/nbt.2261. PubMed PMID: 22678379.

    Not in our library10.1038/nbt.2261

45. 45.
    The FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship · 2016

    No notice
46. 46.
    Guidance for Developers of Health Research Reporting Guidelines · 2010

    No notice
47. 47.

    Chambers K Collings A. Graf C. Kiermer V. Mellor D.T. Macleod M. Swaminathan S. Sweet D. Vinson V. Towards minimum reporting standards for life scientists MetaArXiv. 2019. doi: 10.31222/osf.io/9sm4x.

    Not in our library

48. 48.

    Rands SA. Inclusion of policies on ethical standards in animal experiments in biomedical science journals. J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci2011; 50(6): 901–903. Epub 2012/02/15. PubMed PMID: 22330784; PubMed Central PMCID: PMCPMC3228928.

    Not in our library

49. 49.

    Osborne NJ Payne D Newman ML. Journal editorial policies, animal welfare, and the 3Rs.Am J Bioeth2009; 9(12): 55–59. Epub 2009/12/17. doi:10.1080/15265160903318343. PubMed PMID: 20013503.

    Not in our library10.1080/15265160903318343

50. 50.

    Vasilevsky NA Minnier J Haendel MA Champieux RE. Reproducible and reusable research: are journal data sharing policies meeting the mark?PeerJ2017; 5. doi: 10.7717/peerj.3208. PubMed PMID: WOS:000400303800002.

    Not in our library10.7717/peerj.3208

51. 51.

    Giofre D Cumming G Fresc L Boedker I Tressoldi P. The influence of journal submission guidelines on authors' reporting of statistics and use of open research practices. PLoS ONE2017; 12(4). doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0175583. PubMed PMID: WOS:000399874800038.

    Not in our library10.1371/journal.pone.0175583

52. 52.

    Michel MC Murphy TJ Motulsky HJ. New author guidelines for displaying data and reporting data analysis and statistical methods in experimental biology.Mol Pharmacol2020; 97(1): 49–60. Epub 2019/12/29. doi: 10.1124/mol.119.118927. PubMed PMID: 31882404.

    Not in our library10.1124/mol.119.118927

53. 53.

    Rowan-Legg A Weijer C Gao J Fernandez C. A comparison of journal instructions regarding institutional review board approval and conflict-of-interest disclosure between 1995 and 2005. J Med Ethics2009; 35(1): 74–78. doi: 10.1136/jme.2008.024299. PubMed PMID: WOS:000261929300018.

    Not in our library10.1136/jme.2008.024299

54. 54.

    Ancker JS Flanagin A. A comparison of conflict of interest policies at peer-reviewed journals in different scientific disciplines.Sci Eng Ethics2007; 13(2): 147–157. Epub 2007/08/25. doi: 10.1007/s11948-007-9011-z. PubMed PMID: 17717729.

    Not in our library10.1007/s11948-007-9011-z

55. 55.

    Updated RCUK guidance for funding applications involving animal research2015 [18 Nov 2019]. Available from: https://mrc.ukri.org/news/browse/updated-rcuk-guidance-for-funding-applications-involving-animal-research/. [cited 16 June 2020].

    Not in our library

56. 56.

    Prager EM Chambers KE Plotkin JL McArthur DL Bandrowski AE Bansal N, et al. Improving transparency and scientific rigor in academic publishing. J Neurosci Res2018. Epub 2018/12/07. doi: 10.1002/jnr.24340. PubMed PMID: 30506706.

    Not in our library10.1002/jnr.24340

57. 57.

    Enhancing reproducibility. Nat Methods. 2013;10(5):367. Epub 2013/06/14. PubMed PMID: 23762900.

    Not in our library10.1038/nmeth.2471

58. 58.

    Curtis MJ Alexander S Cirino G Docherty JR George CH Giembycz MA, et al. Experimental design and analysis and their reporting II: updated and simplified guidance for authors and peer reviewers.Br J Pharmacol2018; 175(7): 987–993. Epub 2018/03/10. doi: 10.1111/bph.14153. PubMed PMID: 29520785; PubMed Central PMCID: PMCPMC5843711.

    Not in our library10.1111/bph.14153

59. 59.

    Heaven D. AI peer reviewers unleashed to ease publishing grind.Nature2018; 563(7733): 609–610. Epub 2018/11/30. doi: 10.1038/d41586-018-07245-9. PubMed PMID: 30482927.

    Not in our library10.1038/d41586-018-07245-9

Cited by papers we hold 5

• The Importance of Animal Models in Biomedical Research: Current Insights and Applications · 2023
  No notice
• Sex differences in audience effects on anogenital scent marking in the red-fronted lemur · 2022
  Not checked
• Pharmacological Inhibition of FAK-Pyk2 Pathway Protects Against Organ Damage and Prolongs the Survival of Septic Mice · 2022
  Not checked
• A Handful of Details to Ensure the Experimental Reproducibility on the FORCED Running Wheel in Rodents: A Systematic Review · 2021
  Not checked
• Zinc attenuates ferroptosis and promotes functional recovery in contusion spinal cord injury by activating Nrf2/GPX4 defense pathway · 2021
  No notice

Reads

A person counts once a day per paper. We keep no cookie and no address: a reader is a hash that changes every day. Any month under five reads shows no number.