1
|
Ellis RJ. Questionable Research Practices, Low Statistical Power, and Other Obstacles to Replicability: Why Preclinical Neuroscience Research Would Benefit from Registered Reports. eNeuro 2022; 9:ENEURO.0017-22.2022. [PMID: 35922130 PMCID: PMC9351632 DOI: 10.1523/eneuro.0017-22.2022] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/13/2022] [Revised: 05/22/2022] [Accepted: 05/31/2022] [Indexed: 02/03/2023] Open
Abstract
Replicability, the degree to which a previous scientific finding can be repeated in a distinct set of data, has been considered an integral component of institutionalized scientific practice since its inception several hundred years ago. In the past decade, large-scale replication studies have demonstrated that replicability is far from favorable, across multiple scientific fields. Here, I evaluate this literature and describe contributing factors including the prevalence of questionable research practices (QRPs), misunderstanding of p-values, and low statistical power. I subsequently discuss how these issues manifest specifically in preclinical neuroscience research. I conclude that these problems are multifaceted and difficult to solve, relying on the actions of early and late career researchers, funding sources, academic publishers, and others. I assert that any viable solution to the problem of substandard replicability must include changing academic incentives, with adoption of registered reports being the most immediately impactful and pragmatic strategy. For animal research in particular, comprehensive reporting guidelines that document potential sources of sensitivity for experimental outcomes is an essential addition.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Randall J Ellis
- Friedman Brain Institute, Department of Neuroscience, Addiction Institute of Mount Sinai, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY 10029
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Nelson NC, Ichikawa K, Chung J, Malik MM. Mapping the discursive dimensions of the reproducibility crisis: A mixed methods analysis. PLoS One 2021; 16:e0254090. [PMID: 34242331 PMCID: PMC8270481 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0254090] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/24/2020] [Accepted: 06/18/2021] [Indexed: 11/19/2022] Open
Abstract
To those involved in discussions about rigor, reproducibility, and replication in science, conversation about the "reproducibility crisis" appear ill-structured. Seemingly very different issues concerning the purity of reagents, accessibility of computational code, or misaligned incentives in academic research writ large are all collected up under this label. Prior work has attempted to address this problem by creating analytical definitions of reproducibility. We take a novel empirical, mixed methods approach to understanding variation in reproducibility discussions, using a combination of grounded theory and correspondence analysis to examine how a variety of authors narrate the story of the reproducibility crisis. Contrary to expectations, this analysis demonstrates that there is a clear thematic core to reproducibility discussions, centered on the incentive structure of science, the transparency of methods and data, and the need to reform academic publishing. However, we also identify three clusters of discussion that are distinct from the main body of articles: one focused on reagents, another on statistical methods, and a final cluster focused on the heterogeneity of the natural world. Although there are discursive differences between scientific and popular articles, we find no strong differences in how scientists and journalists write about the reproducibility crisis. Our findings demonstrate the value of using qualitative methods to identify the bounds and features of reproducibility discourse, and identify distinct vocabularies and constituencies that reformers should engage with to promote change.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nicole C. Nelson
- Department of Medical History and Bioethics, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin, United States of America
| | - Kelsey Ichikawa
- Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Study, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States of America
| | - Julie Chung
- Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Study, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States of America
| | - Momin M. Malik
- Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States of America
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Voikar V, Gaburro S. Three Pillars of Automated Home-Cage Phenotyping of Mice: Novel Findings, Refinement, and Reproducibility Based on Literature and Experience. Front Behav Neurosci 2020; 14:575434. [PMID: 33192366 PMCID: PMC7662686 DOI: 10.3389/fnbeh.2020.575434] [Citation(s) in RCA: 66] [Impact Index Per Article: 13.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/09/2020] [Accepted: 10/05/2020] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
Animal models of neurodegenerative and neuropsychiatric disorders require extensive behavioral phenotyping. Currently, this presents several caveats and the most important are: (i) rodents are nocturnal animals, but mostly tested during the light period; (ii) the conventional behavioral experiments take into consideration only a snapshot of a rich behavioral repertoire; and (iii) environmental factors, as well as experimenter influence, are often underestimated. Consequently, serious concerns have been expressed regarding the reproducibility of research findings on the one hand, and appropriate welfare of the animals (based on the principle of 3Rs-reduce, refine and replace) on the other hand. To address these problems and improve behavioral phenotyping in general, several solutions have been proposed and developed. Undisturbed, 24/7 home-cage monitoring (HCM) is gaining increased attention and popularity as demonstrating the potential to substitute or complement the conventional phenotyping methods by providing valuable data for identifying the behavioral patterns that may have been missed otherwise. In this review, we will briefly describe the different technologies used for HCM systems. Thereafter, based on our experience, we will focus on two systems, IntelliCage (NewBehavior AG and TSE-systems) and Digital Ventilated Cage (DVC®, Tecniplast)-how they have been developed and applied during recent years. Additionally, we will touch upon the importance of the environmental/experimenter artifacts and propose alternative suggestions for performing phenotyping experiments based on the published evidence. We will discuss how the integration of telemetry systems for deriving certain physiological parameters can help to complement the description of the animal model to offer better translation to human studies. Ultimately, we will discuss how such HCM data can be statistically interpreted and analyzed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Vootele Voikar
- Neuroscience Center, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland
| | | |
Collapse
|
4
|
Ponte G, Andrews P, Galligioni V, Pereira J, Fiorito G. Cephalopod Welfare, Biological and Regulatory Aspects: An EU Experience. Anim Welf 2019. [DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-13947-6_9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/22/2022]
|
5
|
An alcohol withdrawal test battery measuring multiple behavioral symptoms in mice. Alcohol 2018; 68:19-35. [PMID: 29427828 DOI: 10.1016/j.alcohol.2017.08.014] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/04/2017] [Revised: 08/30/2017] [Accepted: 08/31/2017] [Indexed: 12/30/2022]
Abstract
Despite acceptance that risk for alcohol-use disorder (AUD) has a large genetic component, the identification of genes underlying various components of risk for AUD has been hampered in humans, in part by the heterogeneity of expression of the phenotype. One aspect of AUD is physical dependence. Alcohol withdrawal is a serious consequence of alcohol dependence with multiple symptoms, many of which are seen in multiple species, and can be experienced over a wide-ranging time course. In the present three studies, we developed a battery of withdrawal tests in mice, examining behavioral symptoms from multiple domains that could be measured over time. To permit eventual use of the battery in different strains of mice, we used male and female mice of a genetically heterogeneous stock developed from intercrossing eight inbred strains. Withdrawal symptoms were assessed using commonly used tests after administration of ethanol in vapor for 72 continuous hours. We found significant effects of ethanol withdrawal versus air-breathing controls on nearly all symptoms, spanning 4 days following ethanol vapor inhalation. Withdrawal produced hypothermia, greater neurohyperexcitability (seizures and tremor), anxiety-like behaviors using an apparatus (such as reduced transitions between light and dark compartments), anhedonia (reduced sucrose preference), Straub tail, backward walking, and reductions in activity; however, there were no changes in thermal pain sensitivity, hyper-reactivity to handling, or anxiety-like emergence behaviors in other apparatus. Using these data, we constructed a refined battery of withdrawal tests. Individual differences in severity of withdrawal among different tests were weakly correlated at best. This battery should be useful for identifying genetic influences on particular withdrawal behaviors, which should reflect the influences of different constellations of genes.
Collapse
|
6
|
Kafkafi N, Agassi J, Chesler EJ, Crabbe JC, Crusio WE, Eilam D, Gerlai R, Golani I, Gomez-Marin A, Heller R, Iraqi F, Jaljuli I, Karp NA, Morgan H, Nicholson G, Pfaff DW, Richter SH, Stark PB, Stiedl O, Stodden V, Tarantino LM, Tucci V, Valdar W, Williams RW, Würbel H, Benjamini Y. Reproducibility and replicability of rodent phenotyping in preclinical studies. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 2018; 87:218-232. [PMID: 29357292 PMCID: PMC6071910 DOI: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2018.01.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 134] [Impact Index Per Article: 19.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/25/2016] [Revised: 12/13/2017] [Accepted: 01/11/2018] [Indexed: 12/15/2022]
Abstract
The scientific community is increasingly concerned with the proportion of
published “discoveries” that are not replicated in subsequent
studies. The field of rodent behavioral phenotyping was one of the first to
raise this concern, and to relate it to other methodological issues: the complex
interaction between genotype and environment; the definitions of behavioral
constructs; and the use of laboratory mice and rats as model species for
investigating human health and disease mechanisms. In January 2015, researchers
from various disciplines gathered at Tel Aviv University to discuss these
issues. The general consensus was that the issue is prevalent and of concern,
and should be addressed at the statistical, methodological and policy levels,
but is not so severe as to call into question the validity and the usefulness of
model organisms as a whole. Well-organized community efforts, coupled with
improved data and metadata sharing, have a key role in identifying specific
problems and promoting effective solutions. Replicability is closely related to
validity, may affect generalizability and translation of findings, and has
important ethical implications.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | - John C Crabbe
- Oregon Health & Science University, and VA Portland Health Care System, United States
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Natasha A Karp
- Discovery Sciences, IMED Biotech Unit, AstraZeneca, Cambridge, UK
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | - William Valdar
- University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, United States
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
7
|
Masopust D, Sivula CP, Jameson SC. Of Mice, Dirty Mice, and Men: Using Mice To Understand Human Immunology. JOURNAL OF IMMUNOLOGY (BALTIMORE, MD. : 1950) 2017; 199:383-388. [PMID: 28696328 PMCID: PMC5512602 DOI: 10.4049/jimmunol.1700453] [Citation(s) in RCA: 208] [Impact Index Per Article: 26.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/28/2017] [Accepted: 04/28/2017] [Indexed: 12/29/2022]
Abstract
Mouse models have enabled breakthroughs in our understanding of the immune system, but it has become increasingly popular to emphasize their shortcomings when translating observations to humans. This review provides a brief summary of mouse natural history, husbandry, and the pros and cons of pursuing basic research in mice versus humans. Opportunities are discussed for extending the predictive translational value of mouse research, with an emphasis on exploitation of a "dirty" mouse model that better mimics the diverse infectious history that is typical of most humans.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- David Masopust
- Department of Microbiology and Immunology, Center for Immunology, University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, MN 55455;
| | - Christine P Sivula
- Research Animal Resources, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455; and
| | - Stephen C Jameson
- Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Center for Immunology, University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, MN 55455
| |
Collapse
|