ARRIVE guidelines checklist animal research
By Dr. Zubair Khalid, DVM, MS, PhD ·
Quick Answer
- Use the ARRIVE 2.0 checklist as a manuscript preparation tool, not a post-submission afterthought, to structure each required reporting element before peer review.
- Work through the checklist item by item while drafting, matching each section of your paper to the corresponding reporting criterion.
- The checklist does not replace ethical review or institutional approval, and journals may apply additional reporting requirements beyond ARRIVE 2.0.
Understanding ARRIVE 2.0 and Its Purpose
The ARRIVE guidelines, which stands for Animal Research Reporting of In Vivo Experiments, provide a structured framework for describing animal studies in scientific manuscripts. The original ARRIVE guidelines appeared in 2010, and the revised ARRIVE 2.0 version was published in 2020. The revision simplified the original 20-item checklist into a more focused set of 10 essential items and 11 recommended items. The goal is to improve the completeness and transparency of reporting in animal research so that readers, reviewers, and other researchers can fully understand what was done and why.
The ARRIVE 2.0 guidelines are endorsed by the EQUATOR Network, an international initiative that promotes transparent and accurate reporting in health research. The EQUATOR Network maintains a library of reporting guidelines for different study types, and ARRIVE 2.0 is the designated guideline for animal research. When you prepare a manuscript describing an in vivo experiment, you should consult the EQUATOR Network resources to confirm that ARRIVE 2.0 is the appropriate guideline for your study design.
The primary purpose of ARRIVE 2.0 is not to dictate how experiments should be designed or conducted. Rather, it sets a standard for how experiments should be described in the published record. A well-reported animal study allows readers to understand the experimental conditions, assess the validity of the findings, and potentially replicate the work. Poor reporting can make it difficult or impossible to evaluate a study, even when the underlying science is sound.
The checklist items cover the full arc of an animal study, from the research question and ethical statement through the experimental design, sample size determination, randomization, blinding, statistical methods, and the reporting of results. Each item asks for specific information that is often omitted from manuscripts. For example, many papers describe the number of animals used but do not explain how that number was determined. ARRIVE 2.0 asks for the sample size calculation or the rationale for the chosen group size.
The guidelines also emphasize the importance of describing the experimental unit. The experimental unit is the smallest unit that is independently assigned to a treatment group. In many studies, the experimental unit is the individual animal, but in some designs it may be a litter, a cage, or a group of animals housed together. Confusing the experimental unit with the individual animal can lead to incorrect statistical analysis and inflated sample sizes.
ARRIVE 2.0 is not a regulatory document. It does not replace the ethical review process, institutional animal care and use committee approval, or national regulations governing animal research. The checklist is a reporting tool that complements these requirements. Your institution and funding agency may have additional expectations for how animal studies are described in publications.
The Essential 10 Items
The ARRIVE 2.0 essential items are the core reporting requirements that apply to all animal studies. These ten items cover the most critical aspects of study design and reporting. Each item asks for specific information that should appear in the manuscript.
Study Design
The study design item asks for a description of the experimental groups, the number of experimental units in each group, and the allocation of animals to those groups. You should describe the experimental design in enough detail that a reader can understand the structure of the study. This includes the number of groups, the treatment each group receives, and the number of animals or experimental units in each group.
The description should also include the timing of the measurements and any repeated measures that were taken. If animals were measured at multiple time points, the design should state when each measurement occurred. If some animals were removed from the study before completion, the design should describe the circumstances and the number of animals that were removed.
Sample Size
The sample size item asks for the total number of experimental units in each group and the rationale for that number. The rationale can come from a formal power calculation, a previous study, a pilot experiment, or a practical constraint. The key is to explain why the chosen number of animals is appropriate for the study.
A formal sample size calculation typically requires an estimate of the expected effect size, the variability of the outcome measure, and the desired statistical power. If you performed such a calculation, the manuscript should describe the inputs and the resulting number. If you did not perform a formal calculation, you should explain the basis for the chosen sample size. This explanation can include previous experience with the model, published data, or resource constraints.
Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria
The inclusion and exclusion criteria item asks for a description of the criteria that determined whether an animal was included in the study or excluded from the analysis. These criteria should be established before the experiment begins and should be described in the manuscript.
Inclusion criteria describe the characteristics that an animal must have to enter the study. These can include age, weight, sex, health status, or genetic background. Exclusion criteria describe the conditions under which an animal would be removed from the study or from the analysis. Exclusion can occur before the experiment starts, during the experiment, or after the data are collected.
The manuscript should also describe any data that were excluded from the analysis and the reasons for the exclusion. If an animal died during the study, the report should state whether the data from that animal were included in the analysis or excluded.
Randomization
The randomization item asks for a description of how animals were allocated to the experimental groups. Randomization is the process of assigning animals to groups in a way that reduces the risk of systematic differences between the groups. The description should state whether randomization was used and, if so, the method that was used to generate the allocation sequence.
Common methods include random number tables, computer-generated random sequences, or other formal randomization procedures. The description should also state whether the randomization was performed by a person who was not involved in the experiment. If randomization was not used, the manuscript should state this and explain why.
Blinding
The blinding item describes the measures taken to reduce bias in the study. Blinding means that the people involved in the study do not know which group an animal belongs to. The description should state who was blinded and when the blinding occurred.
Blinding can apply to the people who administer the treatments, the people who measure the outcomes, and the people who analyze the data. The manuscript should describe which of these roles were blinded and how the blinding was maintained. If blinding was not used, the manuscript should state this and explain why.
Outcome Measures
The outcome measures item requires a description of the primary and secondary outcomes that were measured in the study. The primary outcome is the main measure that the study was designed to evaluate. Secondary outcomes are additional measures that were collected.
The description should include the definition of each outcome, the method used to measure it, and the time point at which it was measured. The description should also state whether the outcome measures were assessed before the study began or whether they were selected after the data were collected.
Statistical Methods
The statistical methods item requires a description of the statistical methods used to analyze the data. The description should include the specific statistical tests that were used for each outcome, the software used for the analysis, and the level of statistical significance that was used.
The description should also state whether the analysis was performed on the primary outcome, the secondary outcomes, or both. If the data were transformed before analysis, the transformation should be described. If the data were analyzed with a method that accounts for multiple comparisons, the method should be described.
Experimental Animals
The experimental animals item requires a description of the animals used in the study. This includes the species, strain, sex, age, and weight of the animals. The description should also include the source of the animals and the housing conditions.
The housing conditions should describe the type of housing, the number of animals per cage, the temperature and humidity of the room, the light-dark cycle, and the access to food and water. The description should also describe any environmental enrichment that was provided.
Experimental Procedures
The experimental procedures item requires a description of the procedures that were performed on the animals. This includes the administration of the treatment, the timing of the treatment, and the route of administration. The description should also describe any procedures that were performed to measure the outcomes.
The description should be detailed enough that another researcher could replicate the procedures. This includes the dose of any substance that was administered, the volume of the administration, and the frequency of the administration.
Results
The results item requires a description of the results of the study, including the baseline data, the outcome data, and the statistical analysis. The results should be presented in a way that allows a reader to evaluate the findings.
The results should include the number of animals in each group at each stage of the study. The results should also describe the outcome data for each group, including the mean, the standard deviation, and the statistical significance.
The Supplementary Items
The ARRIVE 2.0 supplementary list contains 11 additional items that are recommended for all studies but are not considered essential. These items provide additional context and detail that can improve the completeness of the report. The supplementary items are not optional in the sense that they can be ignored, but they are not required for every study. The relevance of each supplementary item depends on the type of study and the experimental design.
Abstract
The abstract item asks for a summary of the study that includes the key information about the design, the methods, and the results. The abstract should describe the objective of the study, the number of animals used, the main outcome, and the main result. The abstract should also describe the species and strain of the animals.
Background
The background item asks for a description of the scientific context of the study. The background should describe the rationale for the study and the existing knowledge about the topic. The background should also describe the objective of the study and the hypothesis that was tested.
Objectives
The objectives item asks for a description of the specific objectives of the study. The objectives should be stated clearly and should be aligned with the primary outcome. The objectives should also describe the secondary objectives, if any.
Ethical Statement
The ethical statement item asks for a description of the ethical review that was performed before the study began. The statement should describe the approval that was obtained from the institutional animal care and use committee or the equivalent body. The statement should also describe the ethical considerations that were taken into account.
Housing and Husbandry
The housing and husbandry item asks for a description of the housing conditions and the husbandry practices that were used in the study. This includes the type of housing, the cage size, the bedding, the temperature, the humidity, the light cycle, and the food and water. The description should also describe the enrichment that was provided.
Animal Care and Monitoring
The animal care and monitoring item asks for a description of the care that was provided to the animals during the study. This includes the monitoring of the animals for signs of pain, distress, or illness. The description should also describe the criteria that were used to determine when an animal should be removed from the study.
Interpretation and Scientific Implications
The interpretation item asks for a description of the interpretation of the results and the scientific implications of the study. The interpretation should describe the meaning of the results and the limitations of the study. The interpretation should also describe the implications of the findings for future research.
Generalizability and Translation
The generalizability item asks for a description of the generalizability of the findings. The description should describe the extent to which the findings can be applied to other species, other strains, or other conditions. The description should also describe the translation of the findings to human health.
Protocol Registration
The protocol registration item asks for a description of whether the study protocol was registered before the study began. The description should state whether the protocol was registered and, if so, the registration number and the registry.
Data Access
The data access item asks for a description of the availability of the data that were collected in the study. The description should state whether the data are available and, if so, where they can be accessed.
Declaration of Interests
The declaration of interests item asks for a description of any conflicts of interest that the authors have. The description should state whether the authors have any financial or other interests that could be perceived as a conflict.
At a Glance
The following table summarizes the ARRIVE 2.0 essential items and the key information that should be reported for each item.
| Essential Item | What to Report | Common Omission |
|---|---|---|
| Study Design | Number of groups, number of experimental units per group, allocation method, timing of measurements | Failing to state the number of experimental units per group |
| Sample Size | Total number of animals per group and the rationale for the number | Reporting the number of animals without explaining how it was determined |
| Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria | Criteria for including or excluding animals, data excluded from analysis | Not describing the criteria that were used to exclude animals |
| Randomization | Whether randomization was used and the method of allocation | Stating that randomization was used without describing the method |
| Blinding | Who was blinded and when blinding was maintained | Not stating whether blinding was used |
| Outcome Measures | Primary and secondary outcomes, measurement methods, timing | Not defining the primary outcome |
| Statistical Methods | Statistical tests used, unit of analysis, significance level | Not describing the unit of analysis |
| Experimental Animals | Species, strain, sex, age, weight, source, housing | Not describing the source of the animals |
| Experimental Procedures | Procedures, dose, route, timing | Not describing the dose of the treatment |
| Results | Number of animals per group, outcome data, statistical analysis | Not reporting the number of animals at each stage |
Practical Implementation Steps
The ARRIVE 2.0 checklist is most useful when it is integrated into the manuscript preparation process from the beginning. The following steps describe a practical workflow for using the checklist.
Step 1: Review the Checklist Before You Start Writing
Before you begin writing your manuscript, review the ARRIVE 2.0 checklist and identify the information that you will need to report. This review will help you identify any gaps in your data collection or your records. If you find that you do not have the information that the checklist requires, you may need to collect additional data or to revise your experimental plan.
Step 2: Use the Checklist as an Outline
Use the checklist as an outline for your manuscript. Each item on the checklist corresponds to a section of the manuscript. For example, the study design item corresponds to the methods section, and the results item corresponds to the results section. By using the checklist as an outline, you can ensure that you address each item in the appropriate section.
Step 3: Write the Manuscript with the Checklist
When you write each section of the manuscript, refer to the checklist to ensure that you have included the required information. For example, when you write the methods section, you should describe the study design, the sample size, the randomization, the blinding, and the statistical methods. When you write the results section, you should describe the number of animals in each group and the outcome data.
Step 4: Check the Manuscript Against the Checklist
After you have drafted the manuscript, check it against the checklist. For each item, verify that the required information is present and that it is described clearly. If an item is missing, add the information to the manuscript. If an item is not relevant to your study, state that it is not applicable.
Step 5: Submit the Checklist with the Manuscript
Many journals require authors to submit a completed ARRIVE 2.0 checklist with their manuscript. The checklist should be submitted as a separate file, and each item should be marked as either reported or not applicable. The checklist should also indicate the section of the manuscript where the information is reported.
Records and Measurements
The ARRIVE 2.0 checklist requires that you report specific information about the animals and the procedures. This information should be recorded during the study, not reconstructed after the study is complete. The following records should be maintained during the study.
Animal Records
The animal records should include the species, strain, sex, age, and weight of each animal. The records should also include the source of the animals and the date of arrival. The records should be updated throughout the study to reflect any changes in the animals.
Housing Records
The housing records should include the type of housing, the cage size, the number of animals per cage, the temperature, the humidity, the light cycle, and the food and water. The records should also include any environmental enrichment that was provided.
Procedure Records
The procedure records should include the date and time of each procedure, the person who performed the procedure, and the details of the procedure. The records should also include the dose of any treatment, the route of administration, and the frequency of the treatment.
Outcome Records
The outcome records should include the date and time of each measurement, the person who performed the measurement, and the value of the measurement. The records should also include the method that was used to measure the outcome.
Data Records
The data records should include the raw data that were collected during the study. The data should be organized in a way that allows the analysis to be reproduced. The data should also be stored in a secure location and should be backed up.
Common Failure Patterns
The following are common failures that occur when researchers use the ARRIVE 2.0 checklist.
Failure to Describe the Sample Size Rationale
Many manuscripts report the number of animals used in the study but do not explain how the number was determined. This is a common failure that is addressed by the sample size item. The manuscript should state the rationale for the sample size, whether it is a formal calculation or a practical consideration.
Failure to Describe the Experimental Unit
The experimental unit is the unit that is independent of the treatment. In many studies, the experimental unit is the individual animal, but in some studies it is the cage or the litter. Failure to describe the experimental unit can lead to the analysis being performed on the wrong unit.
Failure to Describe the Randomization Method
Many manuscripts state that animals were randomly assigned to groups but do not describe the method that was used. The checklist requires a description of the method, such as a random number table or a computer-generated sequence.
Failure to Describe the Blinding
Blinding is often not described in manuscripts. The checklist requires a description of who was blinded and when the blinding was maintained. If blinding was not used, the manuscript should state this.
Failure to Describe the Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria
The inclusion and exclusion criteria are often not described in manuscripts. The checklist requires a description of the criteria that were used to include or exclude animals from the study.
Failure to Describe the Statistical Methods
The statistical methods are often described in general terms, without the specific details that the checklist requires. The checklist requires a description of the statistical tests, the unit of analysis, and the significance level.
Welfare and Safety Context
The ARRIVE 2.0 checklist includes items that relate to the welfare of the animals and the safety of the researchers. The ethical statement item requires a description of the approval that was obtained from the institutional animal care and use committee. This approval is a requirement for animal research in the United States and in many other countries.
The housing and husbandry item requires a description of the conditions in which the animals were housed. This includes the temperature, the humidity, the light cycle, and the enrichment. The description should also describe the monitoring of the animals for health and distress.
The experimental procedures item requires a description of the procedures that were performed on the animals. This includes the dose of the treatment, the route of administration, and the frequency of the treatment. The description should also describe the measures that were taken to minimize pain and distress.
The safety of the researchers is also a consideration in animal research. The procedures that are performed on the animals can pose a risk to the researchers, especially when the animals are infected with a pathogen or when the treatment is hazardous. The manuscript should describe the safety measures that were taken to protect the researchers.
Limitations of the ARRIVE 2.0 Checklist
The ARRIVE 2.0 checklist is a valuable tool for improving the reporting of animal studies, but it has limitations. The checklist does not evaluate the quality of the study design or the validity of the results. A study can be reported in full compliance with the checklist and still have a flawed design or a biased result.
The checklist also does not address the ethical justification for the study. The ethical statement item requires a description of the approval that was obtained, but it does not require a description of the ethical justification for the study. The ethical justification is a separate consideration that is addressed by the institutional review process.
The checklist is not a substitute for the statistical review of the manuscript. The statistical methods item requires a description of the statistical methods, but it does not require a review of the statistical analysis. The statistical analysis should be reviewed by a statistician or a reviewer with statistical expertise.
The checklist is also not a substitute for the peer review of the manuscript. The checklist can help the authors to report the study in a complete and transparent way, but it does not evaluate the scientific validity of the study. The peer review process is the primary mechanism for evaluating the scientific validity of a manuscript.
Professional Escalation Criteria
The ARRIVE 2.0 checklist is a tool for the authors of the manuscript. The authors are responsible for completing the checklist and for ensuring that the manuscript is in compliance with the checklist. If the authors are unsure about the requirements of the checklist, they should consult the ARRIVE 2.0 guidelines or the EQUATOR Network resources.
If the authors are not able to complete the checklist because the information is not available, they should consider whether the study should be conducted. The information that the checklist requires should be collected during the study, not after the study is complete. If the information is not available, the authors should consider whether the study should be reported.
If the authors are not able to complete the checklist because the study design does not meet the requirements, they should consider whether the study should be revised. The checklist can be used to identify the gaps in the study design, and the authors should consider whether the gaps can be addressed.
If the authors are not able to complete the checklist because the study is not in compliance with the ethical requirements, they should consult the institutional review board or the ethics committee. The ethical approval is a requirement for the study, and the authors should not proceed with the study without the approval.
Building a Manuscript Compliance Matrix for ARRIVE 2.0
A practical way to manage the ARRIVE 2.0 reporting process is to build a manuscript compliance matrix before you begin writing. This matrix is a working document that maps each checklist item to a specific location in your manuscript, the source record that supports the statement, and the person responsible for verifying the information. The matrix differs from the checklist itself because it tracks the evidence trail behind each statement, beyond whether the statement exists.
Why a Compliance Matrix Works
The ARRIVE 2.0 checklist asks for information that is often scattered across laboratory notebooks, animal facility records, statistical outputs, and ethical approval documents. When you write a manuscript directly from the checklist, you may find that you have the information but cannot locate it quickly. The matrix solves this problem by creating a single document that links each reporting item to its source.
The matrix also helps you identify missing information before you start writing, instead of discovering gaps during the revision process. If you cannot identify a source record for a required item, you know immediately that you need to reconstruct the information or explain its absence. This is especially important for items like randomization and blinding, where the details are often recorded in laboratory notes but not carried through to the manuscript.
Building the Matrix
Create a table with one row for each ARRIVE 2.0 item. Use the following columns:
| Column | Purpose |
|---|---|
| ARRIVE Item | The name of the essential or supplementary item |
| Manuscript Section | The section where the information will appear, such as Methods, Results, or Abstract |
| Source Record | The specific document or record that contains the supporting information |
| Responsible Person | The team member who verifies the statement |
| Status | A marker for whether the information is ready, missing, or not applicable |
The source record column is the most important part of the matrix. For the experimental animals item, the source might be the animal facility receiving records or the vendor health report. For the sample size item, the source might be the power analysis output file or the pilot study data. For the randomization item, the source might be the random sequence generation log or the software output.
Using the Matrix During the Study
The matrix is most effective when you build it during the study, not after the study is complete. At the start of the experiment, list the ARRIVE items that will apply to your study and identify the records that will contain the information. As the study progresses, update the matrix with the location of each record.
For example, when you receive the animals, record the source, strain, sex, age, and health status in the animal facility records. When you assign animals to groups, record the randomization method and the person who performed the allocation. When you perform the sample size calculation, save the output file and note the inputs. When you collect outcome data, record the measurement method and the person who made the measurement.
This approach means that when you sit down to write the manuscript, the matrix already contains the location of every piece of information you need. You do not need to search through notebooks or ask colleagues for details that should have been recorded during the study.
Verifying the Matrix Before Submission
Before you submit the manuscript, use the matrix to verify that each item has a corresponding statement in the manuscript. For each row, confirm that the manuscript section contains the information and that the source record supports the statement. If a statement in the manuscript does not have a source record, you should either find the source or revise the statement.
The matrix also helps you identify items that are not applicable to your study. For example, if your study did not involve randomization because it was a pilot study, you should state this in the manuscript and mark the item as not applicable in the matrix. The ARRIVE 2.0 guidelines expect you to state when an item is not applicable instead of to omit it silently.
A Practical Example of the Matrix in Use
Consider a study that uses mice to test a new compound. The matrix for this study would include the following rows:
- Study Design: Manuscript Section is Methods, Source Location is the study protocol, Responsible Person is the principal investigator.
- Sample Size: Manuscript Section is Methods, Source Location is the power analysis output file, Responsible Person is the statistician.
- Randomization: Manuscript Section is Methods, Source Location is the randomization log, Responsible Person is the technician who generated the sequence.
- Blinding: Manuscript Section is Methods, Source Location is the blinding assignment record, Responsible Person is the person who assigned the codes.
- Experimental Animals: Manuscript Section is Methods, Source Location is the animal facility receiving records, Responsible Person is the animal facility manager.
- Experimental Procedures: Manuscript Section is Methods, Source Location is the procedure log, Responsible Person is the technician who performed the procedures.
- Results: Manuscript Section is Results, Source Location is the statistical analysis output, Responsible Person is the statistician.
When the manuscript is drafted, the principal investigator checks each row to confirm that the information appears in the manuscript and that the source record exists. If the randomization log is missing, the principal investigator knows that the randomization statement in the manuscript cannot be verified and must be addressed.
Common Matrix Failures
The matrix approach fails when the source records are incomplete or when the responsible person does not update the matrix during the study. The most common failure is that the matrix is built after the study is complete, when the source records are no longer available or the details have been forgotten.
Another common failure is that the matrix is treated as a static document instead of a living record. The matrix should be updated as the study progresses, with new source records added and the status column changed from missing to complete. If the matrix is not updated, it becomes a list of missing items at the end of the study.
A third failure is that the matrix is used only for the essential items and not for the supplementary items. The supplementary items, such as the ethical statement and the data access statement, also require source records. The ethical statement should reference the institutional approval document, and the data access statement should reference the data repository or the data sharing plan.
Integrating the Matrix with Data Management
The matrix connects directly to the data management and sharing expectations that apply to funded research. The National Institutes of Health Data Management and Sharing Policy requires researchers to describe how data will be preserved and shared. The matrix can serve as a bridge between the ARRIVE reporting requirements and the data management plan, because it identifies the records that support the manuscript and that should be preserved.
The matrix also supports the transparency expectations of the Committee on Publication Ethics, which requires that authors be able to provide the data and records that support their published claims. If a reviewer or editor asks for the raw data or the randomization log, the matrix tells you where to find it.
Using the Matrix for Team Coordination
The matrix is a coordination tool for the research team. When multiple people are involved in the study, the matrix clarifies who is responsible for each piece of information. The principal investigator can use the matrix to assign tasks and to track progress. The matrix also helps the team to identify gaps in the records before the manuscript is submitted.
For example, if the technician who performed the procedures is responsible for the procedure log, the matrix shows that the log must be complete before the manuscript can be written. If the statistician is responsible for the sample size calculation, the matrix shows that the calculation must be documented before the Methods section can be written.
The Matrix as a Submission Companion
When you submit the manuscript, the matrix can be submitted as a supplementary file or kept as an internal document. Some journals ask for the ARRIVE 2.0 checklist as a separate file. The matrix is a more detailed version of the checklist, because it includes the source records and the responsible persons. The matrix can be used to complete the journal checklist, because it contains the information that the checklist asks for.
The matrix also helps you to respond to reviewer comments. If a reviewer asks for more detail about the randomization method, the matrix tells you where the randomization log is stored and who can provide the details. If a reviewer asks for the sample size rationale, the matrix tells you where the power analysis output is stored.
Records and Measurements
The matrix is a record of the reporting process, not a record of the study data. The study data are recorded in the laboratory notebooks, the animal facility records, and the statistical analysis files. The matrix is a separate document that connects the data to the manuscript. The matrix should be stored with the study records and should be preserved for the same period as the data.
The matrix should be updated when the manuscript is revised. If a reviewer asks for a change to the Methods section, the matrix should be updated to reflect the change. If a statement is removed from the manuscript, the matrix should be updated to show that the item is no longer reported.
Common Failure Patterns
The following are common failures that occur when researchers use the matrix approach.
Failure to Build the Matrix Early
The matrix is most useful when it is built at the start of the study. If the matrix is built after the study is complete, the source records may be lost or the details may be forgotten. The matrix should be built during the study planning phase.
Failure to Update the Matrix
The matrix is a live document that should be updated as the study progresses. If the matrix is not updated, it will not reflect the current state of the study. The matrix should be updated at each major milestone, such as the arrival of the animals, the completion of the procedures, and the completion of the analysis.
Failure to Assign Responsibility
The matrix is only useful if each item has a responsible person. If the matrix does not assign responsibility, the items may not be completed. The matrix should be reviewed by the principal investigator to ensure that each item has a responsible person.
Failure to Verify the Source Records
The matrix is only useful if the source records are verified. If the source records are not verified, the matrix may contain incorrect information. The matrix should be verified by the responsible person before the manuscript is submitted.
Professional Escalation Criteria
If the matrix reveals that a source record is missing, you should decide whether the information can be reconstructed or whether the manuscript must be revised. If the source record is missing for a critical item, such as the randomization method, you should consider whether the study can be reported. The ARRIVE 2.0 guidelines expect that the information is recorded during the study, not reconstructed after the study is complete.
If the matrix reveals that the study design does not meet the ARRIVE 2.0 requirements, you should consider whether the study should be revised or whether the manuscript should be withdrawn. The ARRIVE 2.0 guidelines are a reporting standard, and the study should be designed to meet the standard.
If the matrix reveals that the ethical approval is not available, you should consult the institutional review board or the ethics committee. The ethical approval is a requirement for the study, and the manuscript should not be submitted without the approval.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the difference between ARRIVE 1.0 and ARRIVE 2.0?
ARRIVE 2.0 is the revised version of the original ARRIVE guidelines. The revised version has a shorter list of essential items and a separate list of supplementary items. The revised version also provides more detailed guidance for each item.
Do I need to submit the ARRIVE 2.0 checklist with my manuscript?
Many journals require the checklist to be submitted with the manuscript. The checklist should be submitted as a separate file, and each item should be checked as either reported or not applicable.
What should I do if an item is not applicable to my study?
If an item is not applicable to your study, you should state that the item is not applicable. You should not leave the item blank. The checklist should be completed for each item.
How do I describe the sample size rationale?
The sample size rationale should describe the number of animals that were used and the reason for the number. The rationale can be a formal power calculation, a description of the previous studies, or a practical consideration.
What is the experimental unit?
The experimental unit is the unit that is independent of the analysis. In many studies, the experimental unit is the individual animal, but it can also be the cage or the litter. The experimental unit should be described in the manuscript.
What is the difference between the essential items and the supplementary items?
The essential items are the items that are required for all studies. The supplementary items are the items that are recommended for the studies but are not required. The supplementary items provide additional context and detail.
How can I use the checklist to improve my manuscript?
The checklist can be used as an outline for the manuscript. Each item on the checklist corresponds to a section of the manuscript. By using the checklist as an outline, you can ensure that you address each item in the appropriate section.
What should I do if I have questions about the checklist?
If you have questions about the checklist, you should consult the ARRIVE 2.0 guidelines or the EQUATOR Network resources. You can also consult the institutional review board or the ethics committee for guidance.
Related Diagnostic Guides
References and Further Reading
- Research Methods Resources. National Library of Medicine.
- EQUATOR Network. EQUATOR Network.
- Core Practices. Committee on Publication Ethics.
- NIH Grants and Funding. National Institutes of Health.
- ORCID for Researchers. ORCID.
- Data Management and Sharing Policy. National Institutes of Health.
- Laboratory Biosafety Manual. World Health Organization.
- NCBI Literature Resources. National Center for Biotechnology Information.
- The ARRIVE guidelines 2.0: Updated guidelines for reporting animal research.. PLoS biology, 2020.
- The ARRIVE guidelines 2.0: Updated guidelines for reporting animal research.. British journal of pharmacology, 2020.
- The ARRIVE guidelines 2.0: updated guidelines for reporting animal research.. The Journal of physiology, 2020.
This article is educational and does not replace validated laboratory procedures, institutional biosafety review, manufacturer instructions, or professional interpretation.