Errors, Contaminations, and Confounding Factors in in vivo Studies: Challenges and Practical Solutions

In vivo studies remain a cornerstone of biomedical, pharmacological, and toxicological studies, providing critical insights into the safety and efficacy of novel interventions. However, the reliability and translational value of such experiments are frequently undermined by methodological errors, hidden contaminations, and uncontrolled confounding factors. Poor study design, insufficient randomization, and operator-related inconsistencies introduce variability that may obscure true biological effects. Similarly, viral or microbial infections, environmental contaminants in feed or bedding, and cross-contamination between animals can profoundly alter immune, metabolic, or behavioral outcomes, often without being detected until results prove inconsistent. Furthermore, factors such as temperature, light cycles, handling stress, circadian rhythms, and biological characteristics of the animals introduce additional layers of complexity, leading to irreproducible or contradictory findings. The present study synthesized current evidence on the most common sources of error, contamination, and confounding in in vivo studies, illustrated with practical case examples. It further highlighted best practices for mitigation, including protocol standardization, adherence to ARRIVE guidelines, the use of specific-pathogen-free animals, continuous monitoring of environmental and health parameters, and comprehensive staff training. Emerging solutions such as automation, artificial intelligence, and the progressive integration of in vitro and in silico alternatives are discussed as pathways toward reducing dependence on animal models. By identifying threats to validity and offering practical solutions, this review aimed to enhance reproducibility, reduce unnecessary expenditure of time and resources, and improve the ethical and scientific integrity of in vivo studies, thereby strengthening their translational value in human studies.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Lab Animal Research
Published
2025-06-30
DOI
https://doi.org/10.58803/jlar.v4i3.78
Primary Topic
Animal testing and alternatives
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Errors, Contaminations, and Confounding Factors in in vivo Studies: Challenges and Practical Solutions

Hadis Farokhmoradi, Faezeh Salari-Kakhk
Journal of Lab Animal Research
Animal testing and alternatives
article

Errors, Contaminations, and Confounding Factors in in vivo Studies: Challenges and Practical Solutions

Hadis Farokhmoradi, Faezeh Salari-Kakhk
article en

Abstract

In vivo studies remain a cornerstone of biomedical, pharmacological, and toxicological studies, providing critical insights into the safety and efficacy of novel interventions. However, the reliability and translational value of such experiments are frequently undermined by methodological errors, hidden contaminations, and uncontrolled confounding factors. Poor study design, insufficient randomization, and operator-related inconsistencies introduce variability that may obscure true biological effects. Similarly, viral or microbial infections, environmental contaminants in feed or bedding, and cross-contamination between animals can profoundly alter immune, metabolic, or behavioral outcomes, often without being detected until results prove inconsistent. Furthermore, factors such as temperature, light cycles, handling stress, circadian rhythms, and biological characteristics of the animals introduce additional layers of complexity, leading to irreproducible or contradictory findings. The present study synthesized current evidence on the most common sources of error, contamination, and confounding in in vivo studies, illustrated with practical case examples. It further highlighted best practices for mitigation, including protocol standardization, adherence to ARRIVE guidelines, the use of specific-pathogen-free animals, continuous monitoring of environmental and health parameters, and comprehensive staff training. Emerging solutions such as automation, artificial intelligence, and the progressive integration of in vitro and in silico alternatives are discussed as pathways toward reducing dependence on animal models. By identifying threats to validity and offering practical solutions, this review aimed to enhance reproducibility, reduce unnecessary expenditure of time and resources, and improve the ethical and scientific integrity of in vivo studies, thereby strengthening their translational value in human studies.

Journal of Lab Animal ResearchVol. 4(3)
Islamic Azad University Sanandaj Branch (IR), Ferdowsi University of Mashhad (IR)
Openalex Percentile: Top 75%
Animal testing and alternatives
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Errors, Contaminations, and Confounding Factors in in vivo Studies: Challenges and Practical Solutions — Hadis Farokhmoradi, Faezeh Salari-Kakhk · Journal of Lab Animal Research (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS