期刊文献+

兰州市动物实验研究人员对ARRIVE指南及GSPC知晓情况调查 被引量:5

A Survey on Awareness of the ARRIVE Guideline and GSPC in Researchers Field in Animal Experiments Field in Lanzhou City
原文传递
导出
摘要 目的了解动物实验研究报告指南(ARRIVE指南)与动物实验金标准报告清单(GSPC)在兰州市动物实验研究相关人员中的知晓情况,为其有效推广提供参考依据。方法采用自行设计的问卷对兰州市医学院校教师和临床医学研究生进行调查。调查内容包括调查对象的基本信息,对ARRIVE指南、GSPC及其他医学研究报告指南的知晓情况等。采用SPSS 21.0软件进行统计分析。结果共发放调查问卷329份(包括40名教师和289名研究生),最终回收有效答卷287份。调查结果显示:ARRIVE指南和GSPC在兰州市医学院校教师和研究生中的知晓率,分别为12.5%和11.8%,且师生间知晓率无明显差异(P=0.903)。调查途径以及调查对象的年龄、学历、职业、单位均对知晓率无明显影响(P均>0.05)。调查对象知晓报告指南的主要途径为网络(33.4%)、相关论文(21.2%)和学术报告(17.4%)。结论 ARRIVE指南与GSPC在兰州市动物实验相关人员中的知晓率较低,需要采取针对性措施进行推广与普及。 Objective To investigate the awareness situation on the ARRIVE guideline and the Gold Standard Publication Checklist (GSPC) of animal experiments in researchers in animal experiments field in Lanzhou city, in order to improve the promotion of the two reporting guidelines in China. Methods A self-designed questionnaire was used to investigate the clinical graduate students and teachers in medical college in Lanzhou city, The investigation contents mainly included the basic information of the respondents, the awareness situation on the ARRIVE guideline, GSPC and other medical reporting guidelines. SPSS 21.0 software was used for data analysis. Results A total of 329 questionnaires (40 were from teachers and 289 were from graduate students) were issued, of which, 287 questionnaires were effective, The results showed that the awareness rate on the ARRIVE guideline and GSPC in clinical graduate students and teachers in medical college in Lanzhou city were 11,8% and 12.5%, respectively, and there was no significant difference between students and teachers in awareness rate (P=0.903). The survey approaches, the age, education, job, and the organization of the respondents were all not the influence factors of awareness rate (P〉0.05). The respondents knew about the reporting guidelines mainly through the website (33.4%), related studies (22.2%) and academic reports (17.4%). Condusion The awareness rate on the ARRIVE guideline and GSPC is relative low in researchers in animal experiments field in Lanzhou city, and it needed to take purposeful measures to promote and popularize them.
出处 《中国循证医学杂志》 CSCD 2015年第7期797-801,共5页 Chinese Journal of Evidence-based Medicine
基金 国家自然科学基金项目(编号:81101756 81303147) 兰州大学国家级大学生创新创业训练计划项目(编号:201310730138)
  • 相关文献

参考文献21

二级参考文献153

共引文献301

同被引文献51

  • 1熊玮,魏强,刘雪梅.动物实验研究的系统评价简介[J].中国循证医学杂志,2005,5(2):161-163. 被引量:11
  • 2贾赤宇,白峰,王耘川.2000—2004年《中华烧伤杂志》动物实验论文分析和评价[J].中华烧伤杂志,2006,22(4):285-287. 被引量:2
  • 3Alternatives to animal use in research, testing, and education: summary. End. 22. United States. Congress. Office of Technology Assessment, 1986.
  • 4Roberts I, Kwan I, Evans P, et al. Does animal experimentation inform human healthcare? Observations from a systematic review of international animal experiments on fluid resuscitation. BMJ, 2002, 324(7335): 474-476.
  • 5Festing MF. The scope for improving the design of laboratory animal experiments. Lab Anita, 1992, 26(4): 256-268.
  • 6Festing MF. The design and statistical analysis of animal experiments. ILAR J, 2002, 43(4): 191-193.
  • 7Macleod MR, Ebrahim S, Roberts I. Surveying the literature from animal experiments: systematic review and meta-analysis are important contributions. BMJ, 2005, 331 (7508): 110.
  • 8Macleod MR, O'Collins T, Horky LL, et al. Systematic review and meta analysis of the efficacy of FK506 in experimental stroke. 1 Cereb Blood Flow Metab, 2005, 25(6): 713-721.
  • 9Kilkenny C, Parsons N, Kadyszewski E, et al. Survey of the Quality of Experimental Design, Statistical Analysis and Reporting of Research Using Animals. PLoS ONE, 2009, 4(11): e7824.
  • 10Hooijmans C, de Vries R, Leenaars M, et al. The Gold Standard Publication Checklist (GSPC) for improved design, reporting and scientific quality of animal studies GSPC versus ARRIVE guidelines. LabAnim, 2011, 45(1): 61.

引证文献5

二级引证文献15

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部