Minimum information about a spinal cord injury experiment: a proposed reporting standard for spinal cord injury experiments
- PMID: 24870067
- PMCID: PMC4120647
- DOI: 10.1089/neu.2014.3400
Minimum information about a spinal cord injury experiment: a proposed reporting standard for spinal cord injury experiments
Abstract
The lack of reproducibility in many areas of experimental science has a number of causes, including a lack of transparency and precision in the description of experimental approaches. This has far-reaching consequences, including wasted resources and slowing of progress. Additionally, the large number of laboratories around the world publishing articles on a given topic make it difficult, if not impossible, for individual researchers to read all of the relevant literature. Consequently, centralized databases are needed to facilitate the generation of new hypotheses for testing. One strategy to improve transparency in experimental description, and to allow the development of frameworks for computer-readable knowledge repositories, is the adoption of uniform reporting standards, such as common data elements (data elements used in multiple clinical studies) and minimum information standards. This article describes a minimum information standard for spinal cord injury (SCI) experiments, its major elements, and the approaches used to develop it. Transparent reporting standards for experiments using animal models of human SCI aim to reduce inherent bias and increase experimental value.
Keywords: MIASCI; axonal injury; axonal regeneration; spinal cord injury.
References
-
- Sterling T.D. (1959). Publication decisions and their possible effects on inferences drawn from tests of significance—or vice versa. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 54, 30–34
-
- Cohen J. (1962). Statistical power of abnormal-social psychological research: a review. J. Abnorm. Soc. Psychol. 65, 145–153 - PubMed
-
- Cohen J. (1994). The earth is round (p<.05). Am. Psychol. 49, 997–1003
-
- Prinz F., Schlange T., and Asadullah K. (2011). Believe it or not: how much can we rely on published data on potential drug targets? Nat. Rev. Drug. Discov. 10, 712. - PubMed
-
- Begley C.G., and Ellis L.M. (2012). Drug development: raise standards for preclinical cancer research. Nature 483, 531–533 - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
- R01 NS080145/NS/NINDS NIH HHS/United States
- HD057632/HD/NICHD NIH HHS/United States
- NS080145/NS/NINDS NIH HHS/United States
- R01 HD057632/HD/NICHD NIH HHS/United States
- R01 NS054734/NS/NINDS NIH HHS/United States
- R01 NS067092/NS/NINDS NIH HHS/United States
- R01 NS047484/NS/NINDS NIH HHS/United States
- R01 NS064004/NS/NINDS NIH HHS/United States
- R00 MH095768/MH/NIMH NIH HHS/United States
- U01HL111561/HL/NHLBI NIH HHS/United States
- R21 NS081738/NS/NINDS NIH HHS/United States
- G1000864/MRC_/Medical Research Council/United Kingdom
- RC2 HG005668/HG/NHGRI NIH HHS/United States
- R01 NS080388/NS/NINDS NIH HHS/United States
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical