A survey of Chineseresearchers' knowledge of animal experimental design methods and reporting standards

Ting Zhang,Xuliang Liao,Bo Li,Zhenggang Bai,Yali Liu,Fei Zhao,Hongmei Chen,Bin Ma
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1674-4055.2019.01.05
2019-01-01
Abstract:Understand the cognitive rate and practical application of SYRCLE animal experiment risk assessment tools and animal experimental research report standards (ARRIVE guidelines and GSPC) among relevant researchers in the field of Chinese animal experiment basic research. Methods The self-designed questionnaire was used to conduct a survey of basic animal research personnel nationwide. The survey included basic information of the respondents, SYRCLE animal experiment bias risk tools, ARRIVE guidelines and GSPC list cognition rate, and animal experiment bias risk control factors. Known rate, status report of published animal experimental research, etc. Data entry was performed using EpiData 3.1 software, and statistical description was performed by Excel (Microsoft Excel 2013). The number of cases (n) and percentage (%) of the classified data were statistically described. Inter-group (postgraduate vs. university teachers/doctors/researchers) Compare the 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.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?