Table 5.
Methodological quality of animal research published in three critical care journals: rodent/rabbit versus nonrodent/nonrabbit subgroup
| Criterion |
Number of publications meeting criterion;
n
(%) [95% CI] |
||
|---|---|---|---|
| Rodent/rabbit ( n = 54) | Nonrodent/nonrabbit ( n = 23) | p value | |
| This study’s pre-defined primary outcome |
|
|
|
| Animal strain, sex, and weight or age described |
45 (83%) [71%, 91%] |
7 (30%) [15%, 51%] |
<0.001 |
| Methods |
|
|
|
| Animal numbers stated in methods |
35 (65%) [51%, 76%] |
21 (91%) [72%, 99%] |
0.049 |
| Reporting randomization |
25 (46%) [34%, 59%] |
22 (96%) [77%, >99%] |
<0.001 |
| Results: animal descriptions reported |
|
|
|
| Sex |
48 (89%) [77%, 95%] |
11 (48%) [29%, 67%] |
<0.001 |
| Weight |
38 (70%) [57%, 81%] |
22 (96%) [77%, >99%] |
0.011 |
| Source |
30 (56%) [42%, 68%] |
3 (13%) [4%, 33%] |
<0.001 |
| Results: outcomes reported |
|
|
|
| Extra animals used in the results (that were not stated in methods) |
27 (50%) [37%, 63%] |
4 (17%) [6%, 38%] |
0.007 |
| Animal numbers in the majority of tables and graphs |
37 (69%) [55%, 79%] |
9 (39%) [22%, 59%] |
0.016 |
| Baseline characteristics of treatment groups described |
9 (17%) [9%, 29%] |
15 (65%) [45%, 81%] |
<0.001 |
| Discussion |
|
|
|
| Limitation to external validity (to humans) mentioned |
16 (33%) [19%, 43%] |
16 (70%) [49%, 85%] |
0.002 |
| Composite quality outcomes |
|
|
|
| Reporting randomization and any blinding, and numbers given with denominators for the majority of outcomes |
10 (19%) [10%, 31%] |
4 (17%) [6%, 38%] |
ns |
| Criteria above and meeting this study’s pre-defined primary outcome | 8 (15%) [7%, 27%] | 0 (0%) [0%, 13%] | ns |
Animals in the publications were nonrodent/nonrabbit- baboon (1), dog (3), pig (17), sheep (2); rodent/rabbit- mouse (17), rabbit (5), and rat (32). There were no statistically significant differences between these subgroups in any of the other methodological criteria shown in Tables 1, 2, 3 and 4. ns, not significant.