This page contains links to some of the many reporting guidelines that are available.
Good reporting is only possible if experiments have been well planned - see the PREPARE guidelines (here is a comparison between ARRIVE and PREPARE).

In vivo studies

• Promoting Reusable and Open Methods and Protocols (Pro-Map), EU Commission report (2024)
• The ARRIVE guidelines, including advice, with examples, on data interpretation; data reporting; generalisation and translatability; abstract writing; data access; and declaration of interests
• The ARRIVE compliance checker - upcoming tool to automatically check if manuscripts include key experimental details
• The Gold Standard Publication Checklist (GSPC) (Hooijmans et al., 2010)
• MDAR (Materials Design Analysis Reporting framework) - reporting guidance for the life sciences
• Guidelines for reporting the results of experiments using mammals (GV-SOLAS, 1985)
• Guidelines for reporting the results of experiments on fish (Smith & Brattelid, 2000)
• Consensus Preclinical Checklist (PRECHECK)
• SHADE - A tool to perform power analysis for common test statistics, and a reporter tool to draft a description for an ethics committee
• MNMS: Minimal Metadata Set to repurpose nonclinical in vivo data for biomedical research (Moresis et al., 2024)
• HARRP (Harmonized Animal Research Reporting Principles)
• The MERIDIAN network (Menagerie of Reporting Guidelines Involving Animals)
• The EQUATOR network: Enhancing the Quality and Transparency Of Health Research: list of reporting guidelines
• Guidelines for design and reporting of animal pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic studies (2018)
• CONSORT: guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials
• Animal Pharmacokinetic/Pharmacodynamic Studies (APPS) Reporting Guidelines (Singh J et al., 2018)
• Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts submitted to Biomedical Journals (Vancouver Convention)
• An Unforeseen Events Report Form (see also CIRS-LAS)
• An End of Study Report Form

In vitro studies

• DRIVER (Designing and Reporting In Vitro Experiments Responsibly)
• GIVReSt (Guidance for Good In Vitro Reporting Standards)

Further reading

• RegCheck - A tool enabling comparison between protocols and papers to identify deviations. It can be used by researchers when writing their papers and by peer-reviewers during their evaluations.
• ScreenIT - A suite of tools for automated screening of manuscripts. Each tool identifies a different issue, from colour schemes that will not work for people with colourblindness, to inappropriate bar graphs and missing information.
• Reynolds & Pearl (2026): Reporting and transparency in laboratory animal science: Past achievements, present concerns and future directions
• Moher et al. (2024): Reporting on data-sharing: executive position of the EQUATOR Network
• Novak, Shaw & Clutton (2022): Animal welfare requirements in publishing guidelines 
• Reporting the Results of an Animal-based Scientific Investigation - an edited version of a guide produced by Arieh Bomzon and presented at the 2016 FELASA Congress
• The Principal Investigator Advisor Newsletter
• Recommendations for the publication of negative (or null) results (Bespalov et al., 2019)