Poor experimental design and statistical analysis could contribute to widespread problems in reproducing preclinical animal experiments.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Relevant articles
Open Access articles citing this article.
-
Guidelines for planning and conducting high-quality research and testing on animals
Laboratory Animal Research Open Access 10 July 2020
Access options
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 51 print issues and online access
$199.00 per year
only $3.90 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on SpringerLink
- Instant access to the full article PDF.
USD 39.95
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
References
Vogt, L., Reichlin, T. S., Nathues, C. & Würbel, H. PLoS Biol. 14, e2000598 (2016).
Reichlin, T. S., Vogt, L. & Würbel, H. PLoS ONE 11, e0165999 (2016).
Wicherts, J. M. et al. Front. Psychol. 7, 1832 (2016).
Related links
Related links
Related links in Nature Research
1,500 scientists lift the lid on reproducibility 2016-May-25
Web tool aims to reduce flaws in animal studies 2016-Feb-29
Surge in support for animal-research guidelines 2016-Feb-01
Missing mice: gaps in data plague animal research 2016-Jan-05
Poorly designed animal experiments in the spotlight 2015-Oct-13
UK funders demand strong statistics for animal studies 2015-Apr-15
Nature special: Challenges in irreproducible research
Related external links
Animal Research: Reporting of In Vivo Experiments (ARRIVE) guidelines
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Skibba, R. Swiss survey highlights potential flaws in animal studies. Nature (2016). https://doi.org/10.1038/nature.2016.21093
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nature.2016.21093
This article is cited by
-
Guidelines for planning and conducting high-quality research and testing on animals
Laboratory Animal Research (2020)