Reporting of measures against bias in nonclinical published research studies: a journal-based comparison
The analysis showed that the reporting standards remained low, also when other statistical information is concerned. Additionally, our results suggest that the reporting in articles on in vivo experiments is better compared to articles on in vitro experiments. Furthermore, important differences in reporting standards between journals seem to exist.
Authors
- Thomas Steckler
- Sara Steele (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6684-5220)
- Tom Lavrijssen
Institutions
- Johnson & Johnson (United States) (US)
- Department of Public Health (US)
- Johnson & Johnson (Brazil) (BR)
- KU Leuven (BE)
Publication Details
- Journal
- Research Integrity and Peer Review
- Published
- 2025-08-29
- DOI
- https://doi.org/10.1186/s41073-025-00176-w
- Citations
- 1
- Primary Topic
- Animal testing and alternatives
- Type
- article
- Field-Weighted Citation Impact
- 2.35
Funders
- Agentschap Innoveren en Ondernemen