A call to action to address critical flaws and bias in laboratory animal experiments and preclinical research
Abstract During the design of hypothesis-driven, comparative laboratory animal experiments, investigators must control for cage effects, ensure full blinding and full randomization while adhering to established experimental designs, notably variations of the Completely Randomized Design and the Rand...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Nature Portfolio
2025-08-01
|
| Series: | Scientific Reports |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-15935-4 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1849226360120147968 |
|---|---|
| author | Hugh G. G. Townsend Klaus Osterrieder Murray D. Jelinski Douglas W. Morck Cheryl L. Waldner William R. Cox Volker Gerdts Andrew A. Potter Lorne A. Babiuk James C. Cross |
| author_facet | Hugh G. G. Townsend Klaus Osterrieder Murray D. Jelinski Douglas W. Morck Cheryl L. Waldner William R. Cox Volker Gerdts Andrew A. Potter Lorne A. Babiuk James C. Cross |
| author_sort | Hugh G. G. Townsend |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract During the design of hypothesis-driven, comparative laboratory animal experiments, investigators must control for cage effects, ensure full blinding and full randomization while adhering to established experimental designs, notably variations of the Completely Randomized Design and the Randomized Block Designs. Failure to meet these criteria introduces partial or complete confounding by multiple known and unknown variables, resulting in biased outcome measures and rendering valid statistical analysis impossible. Our analysis of a stratified, random sample of comparative laboratory animal experiments conducted in North America and Europe and published in 2022, shows that as few as 0–2.5% utilized valid, unbiased experimental designs. The failure of investigators to adopt valid, unbiased study designs undermines scientific rigour, squanders resources and animal lives, and impedes the reliable translation of preclinical research findings to human and veterinary medicine. We propose practical, achievable solutions focused on enhancing the rigour and validity of study designs. This includes developing a specialized group of scientists with expertise in the design of laboratory animal experiments and data analysis, to ensure future studies are conducted with the highest scientific standards. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-7a8cc83c15d54f8a927e7a01a25b1a2a |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 2045-2322 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2025-08-01 |
| publisher | Nature Portfolio |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Scientific Reports |
| spelling | doaj-art-7a8cc83c15d54f8a927e7a01a25b1a2a2025-08-24T11:26:10ZengNature PortfolioScientific Reports2045-23222025-08-0115111110.1038/s41598-025-15935-4A call to action to address critical flaws and bias in laboratory animal experiments and preclinical researchHugh G. G. Townsend0Klaus Osterrieder1Murray D. Jelinski2Douglas W. Morck3Cheryl L. Waldner4William R. Cox5Volker Gerdts6Andrew A. Potter7Lorne A. Babiuk8James C. Cross9Department of Large Animal Clinical Sciences, Western College of Veterinary Medicine (Emeritus) and Vaccine and Infectious Disease Organization (Retired), University of SaskatchewanUniversity of Veterinary Medicine Hannover, FoundationDepartment of Large Animal Clinical Sciences, Western College of Veterinary Medicine, University of SaskatchewanDepartment of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Science, University of CalgaryDepartment of Large Animal Clinical Sciences, Western College of Veterinary Medicine, University of SaskatchewanAmphoraxe Life SciencesVaccine and Infectious Disease Organization and Department of Veterinary Microbiology, Western College of Veterinary Medicine, University of SaskatchewanDepartment of Veterinary Microbiology (Emeritus), Western College of Veterinary Medicine and Vaccine and Infectious Disease Organization (Retired), University of SaskatchewanDepartment of Veterinary Microbiology (Emeritus), Western College of Veterinary Medicine and Vaccine and Infectious Disease Organization (Retired), University of SaskatchewanFaculty of Veterinary Medicine (Emeritus), University of CalgaryAbstract During the design of hypothesis-driven, comparative laboratory animal experiments, investigators must control for cage effects, ensure full blinding and full randomization while adhering to established experimental designs, notably variations of the Completely Randomized Design and the Randomized Block Designs. Failure to meet these criteria introduces partial or complete confounding by multiple known and unknown variables, resulting in biased outcome measures and rendering valid statistical analysis impossible. Our analysis of a stratified, random sample of comparative laboratory animal experiments conducted in North America and Europe and published in 2022, shows that as few as 0–2.5% utilized valid, unbiased experimental designs. The failure of investigators to adopt valid, unbiased study designs undermines scientific rigour, squanders resources and animal lives, and impedes the reliable translation of preclinical research findings to human and veterinary medicine. We propose practical, achievable solutions focused on enhancing the rigour and validity of study designs. This includes developing a specialized group of scientists with expertise in the design of laboratory animal experiments and data analysis, to ensure future studies are conducted with the highest scientific standards.https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-15935-4 |
| spellingShingle | Hugh G. G. Townsend Klaus Osterrieder Murray D. Jelinski Douglas W. Morck Cheryl L. Waldner William R. Cox Volker Gerdts Andrew A. Potter Lorne A. Babiuk James C. Cross A call to action to address critical flaws and bias in laboratory animal experiments and preclinical research Scientific Reports |
| title | A call to action to address critical flaws and bias in laboratory animal experiments and preclinical research |
| title_full | A call to action to address critical flaws and bias in laboratory animal experiments and preclinical research |
| title_fullStr | A call to action to address critical flaws and bias in laboratory animal experiments and preclinical research |
| title_full_unstemmed | A call to action to address critical flaws and bias in laboratory animal experiments and preclinical research |
| title_short | A call to action to address critical flaws and bias in laboratory animal experiments and preclinical research |
| title_sort | call to action to address critical flaws and bias in laboratory animal experiments and preclinical research |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-15935-4 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT hughggtownsend acalltoactiontoaddresscriticalflawsandbiasinlaboratoryanimalexperimentsandpreclinicalresearch AT klausosterrieder acalltoactiontoaddresscriticalflawsandbiasinlaboratoryanimalexperimentsandpreclinicalresearch AT murraydjelinski acalltoactiontoaddresscriticalflawsandbiasinlaboratoryanimalexperimentsandpreclinicalresearch AT douglaswmorck acalltoactiontoaddresscriticalflawsandbiasinlaboratoryanimalexperimentsandpreclinicalresearch AT cheryllwaldner acalltoactiontoaddresscriticalflawsandbiasinlaboratoryanimalexperimentsandpreclinicalresearch AT williamrcox acalltoactiontoaddresscriticalflawsandbiasinlaboratoryanimalexperimentsandpreclinicalresearch AT volkergerdts acalltoactiontoaddresscriticalflawsandbiasinlaboratoryanimalexperimentsandpreclinicalresearch AT andrewapotter acalltoactiontoaddresscriticalflawsandbiasinlaboratoryanimalexperimentsandpreclinicalresearch AT lorneababiuk acalltoactiontoaddresscriticalflawsandbiasinlaboratoryanimalexperimentsandpreclinicalresearch AT jamesccross acalltoactiontoaddresscriticalflawsandbiasinlaboratoryanimalexperimentsandpreclinicalresearch AT hughggtownsend calltoactiontoaddresscriticalflawsandbiasinlaboratoryanimalexperimentsandpreclinicalresearch AT klausosterrieder calltoactiontoaddresscriticalflawsandbiasinlaboratoryanimalexperimentsandpreclinicalresearch AT murraydjelinski calltoactiontoaddresscriticalflawsandbiasinlaboratoryanimalexperimentsandpreclinicalresearch AT douglaswmorck calltoactiontoaddresscriticalflawsandbiasinlaboratoryanimalexperimentsandpreclinicalresearch AT cheryllwaldner calltoactiontoaddresscriticalflawsandbiasinlaboratoryanimalexperimentsandpreclinicalresearch AT williamrcox calltoactiontoaddresscriticalflawsandbiasinlaboratoryanimalexperimentsandpreclinicalresearch AT volkergerdts calltoactiontoaddresscriticalflawsandbiasinlaboratoryanimalexperimentsandpreclinicalresearch AT andrewapotter calltoactiontoaddresscriticalflawsandbiasinlaboratoryanimalexperimentsandpreclinicalresearch AT lorneababiuk calltoactiontoaddresscriticalflawsandbiasinlaboratoryanimalexperimentsandpreclinicalresearch AT jamesccross calltoactiontoaddresscriticalflawsandbiasinlaboratoryanimalexperimentsandpreclinicalresearch |