Methodological Rigor in Preclinical Urology: A Systematic Review

What is it about?

The prevalence and trends of essential study design elements in preclinical urological studies were investigated, as the demand for methodological rigour in preclinical studies is increasing. A total of 3768 articles were included in the analysis, and the data on study design elements and animal models used were collected. The study design elements evaluated are considered essential to enhancing the quality of a preclinical study. Among the five experimental elements recommended by the ARRIVE and NIH guidelines, only two were properly implemented (randomisation and statistical analysis). The remaining three factors showed a significant increase in implementation over time. The study suggests that the five experimental elements recommended by both the ARRIVE and NIH guidelines are already being adequately considered or are gradually being incorporated into the study design.

Featured Image

Why is it important?

The study is important because it investigates the prevalence and trends of essential study design elements in preclinical urological studies, as well as key factors that may improve methodological rigour. The demand for methodological rigour in preclinical studies is increasing since research reproducibility and transparency in the medico-scientific field are being questioned. The study is important because it helps to identify the key factors that are essential for methodological rigour in preclinical studies, and the factors that are being well reported over time. Key Takeaways: 1. The study evaluated seven methodological study design elements, and calculated the temporal patterns of their utilisation over a period of 14 years. 2. Only two of the seven elements were properly implemented (randomisation and statistical analysis). 3. The remaining five elements were rarely applied, but among them, blinding, sample size estimation, and housing and husbandry showed a significant increase in implementation over time. 4. The results suggest that the five experimental elements recommended by both the ARRIVE and NIH guidelines (statistical analysis, randomisation, blinding, sample size estimation, and housing and husbandry) are already being adequately considered or are gradually being incorporated into the study design. 5. The NIH guidelines were published 4 years later, so it may be seen that the effect was achieved. 6. Making it easy for researchers to follow may be more important than emphasising adherence to all factors for methodological rigour. 7. Citation density analysis confirmed that studies that could be biased due to less reflection of important methodological factors have a greater influence on urology researchers than methodologically good studies.