动物研究人员对公布负面结果的看法以及随后采取的政策。

IF 1.3 4区 农林科学 Q2 VETERINARY SCIENCES Laboratory Animals Pub Date : 2024-10-24 DOI:10.1177/00236772241271039
Carlos Oscar S Sorzano, Daniel G Hamilton, Eva Mendez
{"title":"动物研究人员对公布负面结果的看法以及随后采取的政策。","authors":"Carlos Oscar S Sorzano, Daniel G Hamilton, Eva Mendez","doi":"10.1177/00236772241271039","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>For over a decade, the non-publication of negative results from preclinical studies has been identified as a significant concern in biomedical research. Such underreporting is considered a contributor to the reproducibility crisis in the field and has been recognized by significant journals such as <i>Science</i> and <i>Nature</i>. In response to the consistently high non-publication rates of preclinical animal research in Europe, a survey was conducted among the biomedical research community to gather their views on publishing negative results. Using the EUSurvey platform, over 200 researchers directly working with animals were surveyed. The study aimed to understand the frequency of negative results, the reasons behind their non-publication, and the perceived pros and cons of making such results public. Insights from the survey could guide steps toward promoting transparency in science, refining research methodologies, reducing animal usage in experiments and minimizing research waste.</p>","PeriodicalId":18013,"journal":{"name":"Laboratory Animals","volume":" ","pages":"236772241271039"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Animal researchers' views on the publication of negative results and subsequent policy adoptions.\",\"authors\":\"Carlos Oscar S Sorzano, Daniel G Hamilton, Eva Mendez\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/00236772241271039\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>For over a decade, the non-publication of negative results from preclinical studies has been identified as a significant concern in biomedical research. Such underreporting is considered a contributor to the reproducibility crisis in the field and has been recognized by significant journals such as <i>Science</i> and <i>Nature</i>. In response to the consistently high non-publication rates of preclinical animal research in Europe, a survey was conducted among the biomedical research community to gather their views on publishing negative results. Using the EUSurvey platform, over 200 researchers directly working with animals were surveyed. The study aimed to understand the frequency of negative results, the reasons behind their non-publication, and the perceived pros and cons of making such results public. Insights from the survey could guide steps toward promoting transparency in science, refining research methodologies, reducing animal usage in experiments and minimizing research waste.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":18013,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Laboratory Animals\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"236772241271039\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Laboratory Animals\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/00236772241271039\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"VETERINARY SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Laboratory Animals","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00236772241271039","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"VETERINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

十多年来,不公布临床前研究的负面结果一直被认为是生物医学研究中的一个重大问题。这种报告不足被认为是造成该领域可重复性危机的一个因素,并得到了《科学》和《自然》等重要期刊的认可。针对欧洲临床前动物研究未发表率居高不下的问题,我们在生物医学研究界开展了一项调查,以收集他们对发表负面结果的看法。利用 EUSurvey 平台,200 多名直接与动物打交道的研究人员接受了调查。这项研究旨在了解负面结果的出现频率、不公布负面结果的原因以及公开负面结果的利弊。调查所获得的启示可为促进科学透明度、改进研究方法、减少实验中的动物使用以及最大限度地减少研究浪费提供指导。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Animal researchers' views on the publication of negative results and subsequent policy adoptions.

For over a decade, the non-publication of negative results from preclinical studies has been identified as a significant concern in biomedical research. Such underreporting is considered a contributor to the reproducibility crisis in the field and has been recognized by significant journals such as Science and Nature. In response to the consistently high non-publication rates of preclinical animal research in Europe, a survey was conducted among the biomedical research community to gather their views on publishing negative results. Using the EUSurvey platform, over 200 researchers directly working with animals were surveyed. The study aimed to understand the frequency of negative results, the reasons behind their non-publication, and the perceived pros and cons of making such results public. Insights from the survey could guide steps toward promoting transparency in science, refining research methodologies, reducing animal usage in experiments and minimizing research waste.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Laboratory Animals
Laboratory Animals 生物-动物学
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
8.30%
发文量
64
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The international journal of laboratory animal science and welfare, Laboratory Animals publishes peer-reviewed original papers and reviews on all aspects of the use of animals in biomedical research. The journal promotes improvements in the welfare or well-being of the animals used, it particularly focuses on research that reduces the number of animals used or which replaces animal models with in vitro alternatives.
期刊最新文献
Cardiorespiratory, hemodynamic, and sedative effects of dexmedetomidine in sheep. Management of zoonoses in research institutions - lessons learned from a Coxiella burnetii outbreak case. An innovative approach for health and safety training and occupational health program annual enrollment for laboratory animal care and use personnel. Extended oxygen supplementation after thoracotomy in rats may improve welfare. Animal researchers' views on the publication of negative results and subsequent policy adoptions.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1