Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 18, 2026

Assessment of Mouse Judgment Bias through an Olfactory Digging Task
Published on: March 4, 2022
Publication bias in laboratory animal research: a survey on magnitude, drivers, consequences and potential solutions
Gerben ter Riet1, Daniel A Korevaar, Marlies Leenaars
1Department of General Practice, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. g.terriet@amc.nl
Context:
Publication bias jeopardizes evidence-based medicine, mainly through biased literature syntheses. Publication bias may also affect laboratory animal research, but evidence is scarce.
Objectives:
To assess the opinion of laboratory animal researchers on the magnitude, drivers, consequences and potential solutions for publication bias. And to explore the impact of size of the animals used, seniority of the respondent, working in a for-profit organization and type of research (fundamental, pre-clinical, or both) on those opinions.
Design:
Internet-based survey.
Setting:
All animal laboratories in The Netherlands.
Participants:
Laboratory animal researchers.
Main Outcome Measure(S):
Median (interquartile ranges) strengths of beliefs on 5 and 10-point scales (1: totally unimportant to 5 or 10: extremely important).
Results:
Overall, 454 researchers participated. They considered publication bias a problem in animal research (7 (5 to 8)) and thought that about 50% (32-70) of animal experiments are published. Employees (n = 21) of for-profit organizations estimated that 10% (5 to 50) are published. Lack of statistical significance (4 (4 to 5)), technical problems (4 (3 to 4)), supervisors (4 (3 to 5)) and peer reviewers (4 (3 to 5)) were considered important reasons for non-publication (all on 5-point scales). Respondents thought that mandatory publication of study protocols and results, or the reasons why no results were obtained, may increase scientific progress but expected increased bureaucracy. These opinions did not depend on size of the animal used, seniority of the respondent or type of research.
Conclusions:
Non-publication of "negative" results appears to be prevalent in laboratory animal research. If statistical significance is indeed a main driver of publication, the collective literature on animal experimentation will be biased. This will impede the performance of valid literature syntheses. Effective, yet efficient systems should be explored to counteract selective reporting of laboratory animal research.
Related Concept Videos
Bias
In statistics, a sampling bias is created when a sample is collected from a population, and some members of the population are not as likely to be chosen as others (remember, each member...
Bias in Epidemiological Studies
Ethics in Research
Toxicity Testing in Animals
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast, controlled...
