Improving the transparency of animal experiments: valuable lessons learned from a systematic analysis of registration protocols

To comprehensively analyze the epidemiological characteristics of research protocols on international animal experiment registration platforms, explore potential factors influencing protocol publication, and offer recommendations to improve animal experiment registration systems. Research protocols registered on the Netherlands’ PCT(Preclinical Trials) and Germany’s ASR(Animal Study Registry) animal experiment registration platforms up to December 30, 2024, were included. Relevant data were extracted, and frequency distributions and percentages were calculated to statistically describe the findings. Factors influencing publication rates were identified using chi-square tests and multivariate binary logistic regression analysis. A total of 272 registered protocols were analyzed, including 124 from the PCT platform and 148 from the ASR platform, originating from 31 countries, spanning 47 research areas, and involving 11 different animal species. Among the studies, 10.0% (27/272) did not report randomization, and none of the randomized studies (132/272) addressed allocation concealment. Additionally, 24.6% (67/272) and 35.3% (96/272) failed to report blinding during intervention implementation and outcome measurement, respectively. Only 43.3% (97/224) of the experiments were completed within the specified timeframe, and among these, merely 23.7% (23/97) achieved full publication. Animal species were identified as potential influencing factors. Studies using pigs as animal models were more frequently published. As a vital measure to enhance the quality of animal experiments, the registration of animal protocols requires joint emphasis and coordinated promotion by multiple stakeholders, including researchers, research institutions, ethics committees, journal editors, funding agencies, and regulatory authorities. Strengthening protocol registration will not only improve transparency, reproducibility, and ethical oversight, but also build a more trustworthy foundation for high-quality evidence and accelerate the clinical translation of animal research.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
BMC Veterinary Research
Published
2026-04-14
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12917-026-05468-x
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

Improving the transparency of animal experiments: valuable lessons learned from a systematic analysis of registration protocols

Fengxing Ding, Jianhua Ruan, Yating Luo, Bin Ma et al.
BMC Veterinary Research
Animal testing and alternatives
article

Improving the transparency of animal experiments: valuable lessons learned from a systematic analysis of registration protocols

Fengxing Ding, Jianhua Ruan, Yating Luo, Bin Ma, Yue Zhao, Shen Yi, Ziyu Ren, Qi Ao, Youhu Wang, Muting Niu, Zhe Wang, Caizhi Wu, Yanli Liu
article en

Abstract

To comprehensively analyze the epidemiological characteristics of research protocols on international animal experiment registration platforms, explore potential factors influencing protocol publication, and offer recommendations to improve animal experiment registration systems. Research protocols registered on the Netherlands’ PCT(Preclinical Trials) and Germany’s ASR(Animal Study Registry) animal experiment registration platforms up to December 30, 2024, were included. Relevant data were extracted, and frequency distributions and percentages were calculated to statistically describe the findings. Factors influencing publication rates were identified using chi-square tests and multivariate binary logistic regression analysis. A total of 272 registered protocols were analyzed, including 124 from the PCT platform and 148 from the ASR platform, originating from 31 countries, spanning 47 research areas, and involving 11 different animal species. Among the studies, 10.0% (27/272) did not report randomization, and none of the randomized studies (132/272) addressed allocation concealment. Additionally, 24.6% (67/272) and 35.3% (96/272) failed to report blinding during intervention implementation and outcome measurement, respectively. Only 43.3% (97/224) of the experiments were completed within the specified timeframe, and among these, merely 23.7% (23/97) achieved full publication. Animal species were identified as potential influencing factors. Studies using pigs as animal models were more frequently published. As a vital measure to enhance the quality of animal experiments, the registration of animal protocols requires joint emphasis and coordinated promotion by multiple stakeholders, including researchers, research institutions, ethics committees, journal editors, funding agencies, and regulatory authorities. Strengthening protocol registration will not only improve transparency, reproducibility, and ethical oversight, but also build a more trustworthy foundation for high-quality evidence and accelerate the clinical translation of animal research.

BMC Veterinary Research
National Medical Products Administration (CN), Gansu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine (CN), First Hospital of Lanzhou University (CN), Lanzhou University (CN)
Openalex Percentile: Top 23%
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.