Reporting preclinical anesthesia study (REPEAT): Evaluating the quality of reporting in the preclinical anesthesiology literature.
Poor reporting quality may contribute to irreproducibility of results and failed 'bench-to-bedside' translation. Consequently, guidelines have been developed to improve the complete and transparent reporting of in vivo preclinical studies. To examine the impact of such guidelines on core m...
Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
2019-01-01
|
Series: | PLoS ONE |
Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0215221 |
id |
doaj-a41cd83c1ab14abfbdd7bdf3fab9263c |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-a41cd83c1ab14abfbdd7bdf3fab9263c2021-03-04T12:38:36ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032019-01-01145e021522110.1371/journal.pone.0215221Reporting preclinical anesthesia study (REPEAT): Evaluating the quality of reporting in the preclinical anesthesiology literature.Dean A FergussonMarc T AveyCarly C BarronMathew BocockKristen E BieferSylvain BoetStephane L BourqueIsidora ConicKai ChenYuan Yi DongGrace M FoxRonald B GeorgeNeil M GoldenbergFerrante S GragasinPrathiba HarshaPatrick J HongTyler E JamesSarah M LarriganJenna L MacNeilCourtney A ManuelSarah MaximosDavid MazerRohan MittalRyan McGinnLong H NguyenAbhilasha PatelPhilippe RichebéTarit K SahaBenjamin E SteinbergSonja D SampsonDuncan J StewartSummer SyedKimberly VellaNeil L WeschManoj M LaluCanadian Perioperative Anesthesia Clinical Trials GroupPoor reporting quality may contribute to irreproducibility of results and failed 'bench-to-bedside' translation. Consequently, guidelines have been developed to improve the complete and transparent reporting of in vivo preclinical studies. To examine the impact of such guidelines on core methodological and analytical reporting items in the preclinical anesthesiology literature, we sampled a cohort of studies. Preclinical in vivo studies published in Anesthesiology, Anesthesia & Analgesia, Anaesthesia, and the British Journal of Anaesthesia (2008-2009, 2014-2016) were identified. Data was extracted independently and in duplicate. Reporting completeness was assessed using the National Institutes of Health Principles and Guidelines for Reporting Preclinical Research. Risk ratios were used for comparative analyses. Of 7615 screened articles, 604 met our inclusion criteria and included experiments reporting on 52 490 animals. The most common topic of investigation was pain and analgesia (30%), rodents were most frequently used (77%), and studies were most commonly conducted in the United States (36%). Use of preclinical reporting guidelines was listed in 10% of applicable articles. A minority of studies fully reported on replicates (0.3%), randomization (10%), blinding (12%), sample-size estimation (3%), and inclusion/exclusion criteria (5%). Statistics were well reported (81%). Comparative analysis demonstrated few differences in reporting rigor between journals, including those that endorsed reporting guidelines. Principal items of study design were infrequently reported, with few differences between journals. Methods to improve implementation and adherence to community-based reporting guidelines may be necessary to increase transparent and consistent reporting in the preclinical anesthesiology literature.https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0215221 |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Dean A Fergusson Marc T Avey Carly C Barron Mathew Bocock Kristen E Biefer Sylvain Boet Stephane L Bourque Isidora Conic Kai Chen Yuan Yi Dong Grace M Fox Ronald B George Neil M Goldenberg Ferrante S Gragasin Prathiba Harsha Patrick J Hong Tyler E James Sarah M Larrigan Jenna L MacNeil Courtney A Manuel Sarah Maximos David Mazer Rohan Mittal Ryan McGinn Long H Nguyen Abhilasha Patel Philippe Richebé Tarit K Saha Benjamin E Steinberg Sonja D Sampson Duncan J Stewart Summer Syed Kimberly Vella Neil L Wesch Manoj M Lalu Canadian Perioperative Anesthesia Clinical Trials Group |
spellingShingle |
Dean A Fergusson Marc T Avey Carly C Barron Mathew Bocock Kristen E Biefer Sylvain Boet Stephane L Bourque Isidora Conic Kai Chen Yuan Yi Dong Grace M Fox Ronald B George Neil M Goldenberg Ferrante S Gragasin Prathiba Harsha Patrick J Hong Tyler E James Sarah M Larrigan Jenna L MacNeil Courtney A Manuel Sarah Maximos David Mazer Rohan Mittal Ryan McGinn Long H Nguyen Abhilasha Patel Philippe Richebé Tarit K Saha Benjamin E Steinberg Sonja D Sampson Duncan J Stewart Summer Syed Kimberly Vella Neil L Wesch Manoj M Lalu Canadian Perioperative Anesthesia Clinical Trials Group Reporting preclinical anesthesia study (REPEAT): Evaluating the quality of reporting in the preclinical anesthesiology literature. PLoS ONE |
author_facet |
Dean A Fergusson Marc T Avey Carly C Barron Mathew Bocock Kristen E Biefer Sylvain Boet Stephane L Bourque Isidora Conic Kai Chen Yuan Yi Dong Grace M Fox Ronald B George Neil M Goldenberg Ferrante S Gragasin Prathiba Harsha Patrick J Hong Tyler E James Sarah M Larrigan Jenna L MacNeil Courtney A Manuel Sarah Maximos David Mazer Rohan Mittal Ryan McGinn Long H Nguyen Abhilasha Patel Philippe Richebé Tarit K Saha Benjamin E Steinberg Sonja D Sampson Duncan J Stewart Summer Syed Kimberly Vella Neil L Wesch Manoj M Lalu Canadian Perioperative Anesthesia Clinical Trials Group |
author_sort |
Dean A Fergusson |
title |
Reporting preclinical anesthesia study (REPEAT): Evaluating the quality of reporting in the preclinical anesthesiology literature. |
title_short |
Reporting preclinical anesthesia study (REPEAT): Evaluating the quality of reporting in the preclinical anesthesiology literature. |
title_full |
Reporting preclinical anesthesia study (REPEAT): Evaluating the quality of reporting in the preclinical anesthesiology literature. |
title_fullStr |
Reporting preclinical anesthesia study (REPEAT): Evaluating the quality of reporting in the preclinical anesthesiology literature. |
title_full_unstemmed |
Reporting preclinical anesthesia study (REPEAT): Evaluating the quality of reporting in the preclinical anesthesiology literature. |
title_sort |
reporting preclinical anesthesia study (repeat): evaluating the quality of reporting in the preclinical anesthesiology literature. |
publisher |
Public Library of Science (PLoS) |
series |
PLoS ONE |
issn |
1932-6203 |
publishDate |
2019-01-01 |
description |
Poor reporting quality may contribute to irreproducibility of results and failed 'bench-to-bedside' translation. Consequently, guidelines have been developed to improve the complete and transparent reporting of in vivo preclinical studies. To examine the impact of such guidelines on core methodological and analytical reporting items in the preclinical anesthesiology literature, we sampled a cohort of studies. Preclinical in vivo studies published in Anesthesiology, Anesthesia & Analgesia, Anaesthesia, and the British Journal of Anaesthesia (2008-2009, 2014-2016) were identified. Data was extracted independently and in duplicate. Reporting completeness was assessed using the National Institutes of Health Principles and Guidelines for Reporting Preclinical Research. Risk ratios were used for comparative analyses. Of 7615 screened articles, 604 met our inclusion criteria and included experiments reporting on 52 490 animals. The most common topic of investigation was pain and analgesia (30%), rodents were most frequently used (77%), and studies were most commonly conducted in the United States (36%). Use of preclinical reporting guidelines was listed in 10% of applicable articles. A minority of studies fully reported on replicates (0.3%), randomization (10%), blinding (12%), sample-size estimation (3%), and inclusion/exclusion criteria (5%). Statistics were well reported (81%). Comparative analysis demonstrated few differences in reporting rigor between journals, including those that endorsed reporting guidelines. Principal items of study design were infrequently reported, with few differences between journals. Methods to improve implementation and adherence to community-based reporting guidelines may be necessary to increase transparent and consistent reporting in the preclinical anesthesiology literature. |
url |
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0215221 |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT deanafergusson reportingpreclinicalanesthesiastudyrepeatevaluatingthequalityofreportinginthepreclinicalanesthesiologyliterature AT marctavey reportingpreclinicalanesthesiastudyrepeatevaluatingthequalityofreportinginthepreclinicalanesthesiologyliterature AT carlycbarron reportingpreclinicalanesthesiastudyrepeatevaluatingthequalityofreportinginthepreclinicalanesthesiologyliterature AT mathewbocock reportingpreclinicalanesthesiastudyrepeatevaluatingthequalityofreportinginthepreclinicalanesthesiologyliterature AT kristenebiefer reportingpreclinicalanesthesiastudyrepeatevaluatingthequalityofreportinginthepreclinicalanesthesiologyliterature AT sylvainboet reportingpreclinicalanesthesiastudyrepeatevaluatingthequalityofreportinginthepreclinicalanesthesiologyliterature AT stephanelbourque reportingpreclinicalanesthesiastudyrepeatevaluatingthequalityofreportinginthepreclinicalanesthesiologyliterature AT isidoraconic reportingpreclinicalanesthesiastudyrepeatevaluatingthequalityofreportinginthepreclinicalanesthesiologyliterature AT kaichen reportingpreclinicalanesthesiastudyrepeatevaluatingthequalityofreportinginthepreclinicalanesthesiologyliterature AT yuanyidong reportingpreclinicalanesthesiastudyrepeatevaluatingthequalityofreportinginthepreclinicalanesthesiologyliterature AT gracemfox reportingpreclinicalanesthesiastudyrepeatevaluatingthequalityofreportinginthepreclinicalanesthesiologyliterature AT ronaldbgeorge reportingpreclinicalanesthesiastudyrepeatevaluatingthequalityofreportinginthepreclinicalanesthesiologyliterature AT neilmgoldenberg reportingpreclinicalanesthesiastudyrepeatevaluatingthequalityofreportinginthepreclinicalanesthesiologyliterature AT ferrantesgragasin reportingpreclinicalanesthesiastudyrepeatevaluatingthequalityofreportinginthepreclinicalanesthesiologyliterature AT prathibaharsha reportingpreclinicalanesthesiastudyrepeatevaluatingthequalityofreportinginthepreclinicalanesthesiologyliterature AT patrickjhong reportingpreclinicalanesthesiastudyrepeatevaluatingthequalityofreportinginthepreclinicalanesthesiologyliterature AT tylerejames reportingpreclinicalanesthesiastudyrepeatevaluatingthequalityofreportinginthepreclinicalanesthesiologyliterature AT sarahmlarrigan reportingpreclinicalanesthesiastudyrepeatevaluatingthequalityofreportinginthepreclinicalanesthesiologyliterature AT jennalmacneil reportingpreclinicalanesthesiastudyrepeatevaluatingthequalityofreportinginthepreclinicalanesthesiologyliterature AT courtneyamanuel reportingpreclinicalanesthesiastudyrepeatevaluatingthequalityofreportinginthepreclinicalanesthesiologyliterature AT sarahmaximos reportingpreclinicalanesthesiastudyrepeatevaluatingthequalityofreportinginthepreclinicalanesthesiologyliterature AT davidmazer reportingpreclinicalanesthesiastudyrepeatevaluatingthequalityofreportinginthepreclinicalanesthesiologyliterature AT rohanmittal reportingpreclinicalanesthesiastudyrepeatevaluatingthequalityofreportinginthepreclinicalanesthesiologyliterature AT ryanmcginn reportingpreclinicalanesthesiastudyrepeatevaluatingthequalityofreportinginthepreclinicalanesthesiologyliterature AT longhnguyen reportingpreclinicalanesthesiastudyrepeatevaluatingthequalityofreportinginthepreclinicalanesthesiologyliterature AT abhilashapatel reportingpreclinicalanesthesiastudyrepeatevaluatingthequalityofreportinginthepreclinicalanesthesiologyliterature AT philipperichebe reportingpreclinicalanesthesiastudyrepeatevaluatingthequalityofreportinginthepreclinicalanesthesiologyliterature AT taritksaha reportingpreclinicalanesthesiastudyrepeatevaluatingthequalityofreportinginthepreclinicalanesthesiologyliterature AT benjaminesteinberg reportingpreclinicalanesthesiastudyrepeatevaluatingthequalityofreportinginthepreclinicalanesthesiologyliterature AT sonjadsampson reportingpreclinicalanesthesiastudyrepeatevaluatingthequalityofreportinginthepreclinicalanesthesiologyliterature AT duncanjstewart reportingpreclinicalanesthesiastudyrepeatevaluatingthequalityofreportinginthepreclinicalanesthesiologyliterature AT summersyed reportingpreclinicalanesthesiastudyrepeatevaluatingthequalityofreportinginthepreclinicalanesthesiologyliterature AT kimberlyvella reportingpreclinicalanesthesiastudyrepeatevaluatingthequalityofreportinginthepreclinicalanesthesiologyliterature AT neillwesch reportingpreclinicalanesthesiastudyrepeatevaluatingthequalityofreportinginthepreclinicalanesthesiologyliterature AT manojmlalu reportingpreclinicalanesthesiastudyrepeatevaluatingthequalityofreportinginthepreclinicalanesthesiologyliterature AT canadianperioperativeanesthesiaclinicaltrialsgroup reportingpreclinicalanesthesiastudyrepeatevaluatingthequalityofreportinginthepreclinicalanesthesiologyliterature |
_version_ |
1714802054790119424 |