Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre, PO Box 5800, 6202 AZ, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
NUTRIM School of Nutrition and Translational Research in Metabolism, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Hernia. 2022 Apr;26(2):389-400. doi: 10.1007/s10029-020-02351-y. Epub 2021 Jan 4.
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.
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.
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).
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.
涉及动物研究的科研论文往往存在较差的报告标准，导致研究再现性降低。我们旨在确定在发布 ARRIVE-2010（动物研究：体内实验报告）指南前后，关于腹壁疝修补术中使用网片的动物研究报告标准的差异。此外，我们旨在使用更新的 ARRIVE-2020 作为标准，呈现最新的报告质量。
系统搜索了所有关于疝修补术中使用网片的动物研究。将发表在 ARRIVE-2010 之前的 5 年内（前 ARRIVE）和更新后的 ARRIVE 2.0 之后的 5 年内（后 ARRIVE）的文章进行比较，分别比较总体物种和特定物种。评估去年发表的文章是否充分报告了（子）项目。
与后 ARRIVE 相比，前 ARRIVE 中每篇文章的充分报告（子）项目数量平均显著更高，总体物种为 14.0（2.8）对 12.6（2.5）（P<0.001）。兔（14.8（2.6）对 12.6（2.6），P=0.001）和猪研究（14.5（2.7）对 11.6（2.6），P=0.004）也是如此，但在大鼠研究中无显著差异（13.6（2.9）对 12.9（2.3），P=0.076）。前 ARRIVE 和后 ARRIVE 之间在几个（子）项目上存在显著性差异（总体物种、大鼠、兔和猪研究的 n 分别为 7、3、8 和 3）。
ARRIVE 指南的实施显著提高了动物实验的一般报告质量。然而，考虑到 ARRIVE 2.0 指南的发布，还需要进一步改进。
