How Transparent and Reproducible Are Studies That Use Animal Models of Opioid Addiction?
Justine C Blackwell1, Julia Beitner2,3,4,5,6, Alex O Holcombe1
1School of Psychology, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Addiction Biology
|April 7, 2025
Summary
Preclinical addiction research shows low transparency and poor reporting, hindering reliable findings and translation. Improving research practices is crucial for advancing the field.
Area of Science:
- Neuroscience
- Behavioral Science
- Pharmacology
Background:
- The reproducibility crisis in psychology prompts reevaluation of research reliability across disciplines.
- Disappointing translation rates in preclinical addiction research highlight potential issues in study design and reporting.
- Transparency and accurate reporting are vital for ensuring the validity and translational potential of scientific findings.
Purpose of the Study:
- To assess the prevalence of transparency measures and reporting quality in animal models of opioid addiction.
- To evaluate the implementation of bias minimization strategies and sample size calculations.
- To identify potential errors in statistical reporting and their impact on research integrity.
Main Methods:
- A systematic review of 255 articles on animal models of opioid addiction published between 2019 and 2023.
- Analysis of transparency indicators: preregistration, registered reports, open data, and open code.
- Assessment of compliance with Animal Research: Reporting of In Vivo Experiments (ARRIVE) guidelines.
- Evaluation of bias minimization practices (randomization, masking, data exclusion), sample size calculations, and multiple comparison adjustments.
- Statistical accuracy assessment using StatCheck to detect p-value inconsistencies and significance errors.
Main Results:
- Low prevalence of transparency measures, including zero instances of study preregistration or shared analysis code.
- Inadequate implementation of bias minimization practices and sample size calculations.
- High adherence to multiple comparison adjustments (76.5%).
- Approximately 50% of papers exhibited p-value inconsistencies, with 11% containing statistical significance errors.
Conclusions:
- Significant gaps exist in transparency and reporting quality in preclinical addiction research, impeding reproducibility and translation.
- While multiple comparison adjustments are common, fundamental issues in study design and statistical reporting persist.
- Recommendations are made for researchers, editors, and institutions to enhance reporting standards and promote robust research practices.
