Abstract:OBJECTIVE:To investigate the awareness and use of the Systematic Review Center for Laboratory Animal Experimentation's (SYRCLE) risk-of-bias tool, the Animal Research: Reporting of In Vivo Experiments (ARRIVE) reporting guidelines, and Gold Standard Publication Checklist (GSPC) in China in basic medical researchers of animal experimental studies.METHODS:A national questionnaire-based survey targeting basic medical researchers was carried in China to investigate the basic information and awareness of SYRCLE's risk of bias tool, ARRIVE guidelines, GSPC, and animal experimental bias risk control factors. The EpiData3.1 software was used for data entry, and Microsoft Excel 2013 was used for statistical analysis in this study. The number of cases (n) and percentage (%) of classified information were statistically described, and the comparison between groups (i.e., current students vs. research staff) was performed using chi-square test.RESULTS:A total of 298 questionnaires were distributed, and 272 responses were received, which included 266 valid questionnaires (from 118 current students and 148 research staff). Among the 266 survey participants, only 15.8% was aware of the SYRCLE's risk of bias tool, with significant difference between the two groups (P = 0.003), and the awareness rates of ARRIVE guidelines and GSPC were only 9.4% and 9.0%, respectively; 58.6% survey participants believed that the reports of animal experimental studies in Chinese literature were inadequate, with significant difference between the two groups (P = 0.004). In addition, only approximately 1/3 of the survey participants had read systematic reviews and meta-analysis reports of animal experimental studies; only 16/266 (6.0%) had carried out/participated in and 11/266 (4.1%) had published systematic reviews/meta-analysis of animal experimental studies.CONCLUSIONS:The awareness and use rates of SYRCLE's risk-of-bias tool, the ARRIVE guidelines, and the GSPC were low among Chinese basic medical researchers. Therefore, specific measures are necessary to promote and popularize these standards and specifications and to introduce these standards into guidelines of Chinese domestic journals as soon as possible to raise awareness and increase use rates of researchers and journal editors, thereby improving the quality of animal experimental methods and reports.

Development of a standard process for systematic reviews on cell experimental studies

Systematic development of a standard process for systematic reviews of animal experimental studies

Analysis of current status of cell experimental system evaluation/Meta-analysis

Search Characteristics and Reporting of Systematic Reviews of Animal Experiments: A Cross-Sectional Study

The search strategy of systematic reviews/meta-analyses in cell studies

Development of a reporting guideline for systematic reviews of animal experiments in the field of traditional Chinese medicine

Methodological and reporting quality of systematic review/meta-analysis of animal studies

How to develop the search strategy of systematic reviews/meta-analysis of animal researches: an introduction

How to Improve the Quality of Animal Experimental System Evaluation--A Comparative Study Based on Animal Experiment System Evaluation and Clinical Trial System Evaluation

Retrieval, Reporting and Methodological Characteristics for Systematic Reviews/meta-Analyses of Animal Models: a Metaepidemiological Study

Cutting-Edge Methodological Guidance for Authors in Conducting the Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Introduction to Systematic Reviews of Animal Studies

Systematic reviews protocol for animal intervention studies

Survey of Basic Medical Researchers on the Awareness of Animal Experimental Designs and Reporting Standards in China

Epidemiology, Methodological And Reporting Characteristics Of Systematic Reviews Of Nursing Interventions Published In China

Development and Qualification of a Scale-Down Mammalian Cell Culture Model and Application in Design Space Development by Definitive Screening Design

Status Survey on Systematic Review/Meta-analysis Related to Interventions Published in the Chinese Journals Entitled with Evidence-Based

Appraising the methodological quality of systematic reviews in biomaterials journals using the AMSTAR tool

Epidemiology, Quality, and Reporting Characteristics of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Nursing Interventions Published in Chinese Journals

Methodological Quality Analysis of Systematic Review/Meta-analysis Published in Chinese Science Citation Database Journals

Epidemiology, Quality And Reporting Characteristics Of Systematic Reviews Of Traditional Chinese Medicine Interventions Published In Chinese Journals