Please contact Norecopa if you know of endorsements that are not on this list.
See also the page of general endorsements for Norecopa's work.

Funders and Regulatory Authorities

Scientific organisations

  • The UK Concordat on Openness describes endorsement of PREPARE in its annual report for 2022. In 2020, they noticed that signatories of the Concordat were mentioning in their contributions to the report for that year that they were following the PREPARE guidelines. For their annual reports in 2021 and 2022, signatories were expressly asked whether they work to PREPARE. In 2022, 80 signatories (including research organisations, learned societies with publications and funders) stated that PREPARE was endorsed and actively supported by them, and 46 organisations stated that they also use the PREPARE guidelines to underpin the ARRIVE reporting guidelines. Nineteen research organisations have also developed specific practices for ensuring that the guidelines are followed by their researchers. Very similar figures were cited in their annual report for 2023.
  • PREPARE was highlighted in the January 2018 edition of the newsletter of the National Centre for the 3Rs (NC3Rs) in the U.K.
  • PREPARE has been endorsed by ANZCCART (Australian and New Zealand Council for the Care of Animals in Research and Teaching)
  • The Swedish Board of Agriculture's 3R Center cites the PREPARE guidelines on their webpage about preparing for animal research.
  • The primer on research involving animals produced by the UK Research Integrity Office (UKRIO) in February 2019 described PREPARE as 'current best practice for laboratory animal science'. Version 2 of this primer, published in 2020, states that 'institutions can support researchers to consider all the topics which may influence the outcome of their studies and aid collaboration by promoting the PREPARE guidelines published in 2017, a good practice checklist for use when planning experimental procedures on animals'.
  • EFPIA published an Industry Statement on Experimental Design in 2019, which supports the use of PREPARE as one of three resources for planning, reporting and publishing in vivo studies.
  • The UK organisation FRAME's website recommends PREPARE when animal research cannot be avoided, as an aid in dissemination of the highest quality and reproducible research, to eliminate needless repetition of experiments and waste of animal lives and funding. FRAME's Review of experimental design training provision for biosciences PhD students at UK universities points out that it would be beneficial to provide specific training in design to early career researchers that are applying for personal licences, mentioning PREPARE specifically.
  • The Quality Principles in Systemic Phenotyping of genetically altered mouse models, published by INFRAFRONTIER, the European research infrastructure for the generation, phenotyping, archiving, and distribution of model mammalian genomes In the the detailed supplementary file, recommend that the PREPARE guidelines should be used in training and when designing phenotyping experiments.
  • A review paper by The US National Primate Research Center Consortium Rigor and Reproducibility Working Group concludes that 'adopting such guidelines consistently at the experiment preparation phase represents one potentially valuable step forward in ensuring that work that is carried out will be robust'.
  • The 3R Center Rhein-Neckar states that PREPARE 'covers all stages of quality assurance, from the management of an animal facility or population to the individual procedures that are part of a study'.
  • The International Society for Applied Ethology (ISAE) lists PREPARE under Educational Resources among 'potentially useful resources for those interested in studying applied ethology or looking for tools to aid in their research'.
  • The Focus on Severe Suffering initiative from the RSPCA, UK, states that using the PREPARE guidelines 'help ensure that you have considered all aspects of a study which can affect its validity and reproducibility, as well as the animals’ welfare' (Disclosure: co-author of PREPARE, Elliot Lilley, was employed by the RSPCA at the time of publication of PREPARE, but has since left) 

Journals and Guidelines for Publication


  • The Animal Welfare Body at Utrecht University describes PREPARE as a guideline for animal experiments, and states that 'using PREPARE is helpful for making a good work protocol design, which supports refinements of animal experiments'. Furthermore, they write: 'PREPARE is relevant for all stages of quality assurance, from individual procedures to managing an animal facility. The experts who are involved have experience in running animal facilities, collaborating with researchers, serving on advisory and regulatory committees and planning animal studies. The guidelines and checklists are developed upon the experiences of the authors during the last 30 years. PREPARE focuses on factors that can dramatically influence the validity and outcome of animal studies. Always use the PREPARE guidelines when planning a project that may involve animals. The guidelines should be used from day one of planning, in close collaboration with the animal facility where the project is executed'.
  • The University of Leicester​ state: 'We, alongside the Home Office, recommend the use of the PREPARE checklist for preparing grant applications.'
  • The University of Zurich recommends the PREPARE guidelines, in their guidance on study design.
  • The University of Lausanne has a list of steps to follow before starting animal experiments, where it  specifically mentions PREPARE
  • Lund University in Sweden uses the PREPARE checklist in their requirements for scientists applying for permission to perform animal research.
  • On a page entitled Optimising animal studies, the University of Edinburgh writes that 'PREPARE acts as an aide memoire for busy researchers and gives them advice on all the issues which may affect the scientific validity and translatability of their research, as well as the animals' welfare'.
  • The League of European Research Universities (LERU) has published Good Practice in Communicating Animal Research at Universities, and points out that 'initiatives such as: the PREPARE guidelines on how to plan animal experiments...are designed to deliver more reliable and translatable research. In addition, these exercises may lead to a reduction of unnecessary animal experiments'.

Scientific papers and media articles

  • Anastasios Moresis et al. (2024) propose the use of minimal metadata sets (MNMS), to facilitate repurposing of preclinical in vivo data from published experiments. The MNMS concept 'builds upon existing initiatives (for example, guidelines such as PREPARE and ARRIVE) to increase transparency in data generation'.
  • In their paper Advocating for Generalizability: Accepting Inherent Variability in Translation of Animal Research Outcomes, Hankenson et al. (2024) state that preparatory checklists, like those provided in ARRIVE2.0, CONSORT, and PREPARE, provide prompts about data disclosures that will help to mitigate potential sources of bias and promote reproducibility and improved research outcomes.
  • In a systematic review of preclinical models of chemotherapy-induced neuropathic pain, Bacalhau et al. (2023) state that implementation of PREPARE 'can substantially improve experimental planning since it takes into account aspects related to the formulation of study (e.g., literature searches, humane endpoints, and experimental design), dialog between scientists and colleagues from the animal facility (e.g., division of labor, education and training, and facility evaluation), and quality control of the components in the study (e.g., housing and husbandry, and necropsy)'.  
  • Vibeke Fosse et al. (2023) present recommendations for robust and reproducible preclinical research in personalised medicine. They write: 'reporting in adherence with ARRIVE and other guidelines requires researchers to have planned for this when designing their experiments. The PREPARE Guidelines fulfil this purpose for the planning of preclinical studies involving animals'.
  • In their paper A guide to open science practices for animal research (2022), Kai Diederich et al. from the German Centre for the Protection of Laboratory Animals (Bf3R) at the Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR) write: The PREPARE guidelines are a list of important points that should be thought-out before starting a study involving animal experiments in order to reduce the waste of animals, promote alternatives, and increase the reproducibility of research and testing [24]. The PREPARE checklist helps to thoroughly plan a study and focuses on improving the communication and collaboration between all involved participants of the study (i.e., animal caretakers and scientists). Indeed, open science begins with the communication within a research facility. It is currently available in 33 languages and the responsible team from Norecopa, Norway’s 3R-center, takes requests for translations into further languages.
  • In the abstract (PD23) entitled More Realistic Budgeting in Grant Proposals would Benefit Research Quality and Animal Welfare for a presentation at the 2022 FELASA congress, Pieter Verbost et al. write that 'Points that need to be improved include standardization of adherence to the PREPARE and ARRIVE guidelines, preregistration and data sharing, and the system that rewards researchers.'
  • Statistician Penny Reynolds (one of the ARRIVE v.2 co-authors), lecturing on reproducibility, demonstrates the need for both planning and reporting guidelines, and states that PREPARE 'identifies the key logistic and procedural task areas that are common to all preclinical studies' (2021). In a Commentary (2022) on preclinical research, reproducibility, and statistical design of experiments, she states that 'procedural change could be accelerated by statisticians becoming more aware of best-practice expectations though evidence-based planning (PREPARE) and reporting (ARRIVE) guidelines. These tools can direct early-stage study planning to ensure that procedures strengthening study validity can be incorporated'. 
  • In a paper entitled Improving rigor and reproducibility in nonhuman primate research, Bliss-Moreau et al. cite PREPARE and state: 'Adopting such guidelines consistently at the experiment preparation phase represents one potentially valuable step forward in ensuring that work that is carried out will be robust'.
  • Following a systematic review of over 90 research papers to investigate compliance with the ARRIVE reporting guidelines, George et al. (2021) state that 'use of both sets of guidelines (ed. ARRIVE and PREPARE) will greatly increase the likelihood of translation success and adherence to the 3R’s principles'.
  • In a review of hamster models of COVID-19 pneumonia, Gruber et al. (2021) state that PREPARE 'helps optimize study designs, including appropriate statistical methods to reduce the number of animals required for a particular purpose'.
  • In a paper entitled Systematic review of guidelines for internal validity in the design, conduct and analysis of preclinical biomedical experiments involving laboratory animals, Vollert et al. (2020) point out that 'only a few specifically address rigorous planning and conduct of studies, which might increase validity from the earliest possible point', citing PREPARE as an example.
  • PREPARE is highlighted in the paper Promoting and improving 3Rs practice: the Korean guidelines, published in BMB Reports in December 2017
  • PREPARE has been endorsed by Ellegaard Göttingen Minipigs (magazine article about PREPARE).
  • An Opinion piece in the journal Shock in March 2020 states that, 'at the beginning of a study, the investigator should consider consulting general best-practice planning checklists, such as PREPARE'.
  • In a paper on the role of the environment and experimenter in the reproducibility of behavioural studies, Martina Nigri et al. (2022), citing PREPARE, state that 'authors should familiarize themselves with guidelines for preparing, conducting and reporting before even starting the experiments'.
  • Writing about preregistration of protocols, Mira van der Naald et al. (2022) point out that PREPARE and preregistration improve research rigour and robustness by supporting scientists much earlier in the process than reporting guidelines do.
  • In an overview of the ways in which publishing has changed over the years, Librarians Melissa Ratajeski and Rebekah Miller at the University of Pittsburg mention the PREPARE guidelines, writing:
    'Literature searches are the first item on the PREPARE guidelines checklist for planning experiments. The intention of this checklist is not to prove regulatory compliance but rather to serve as a reminder to researchers of what should be considered 'vital for the success and validity of the experiment, for health and safety, and for animal welfare. Specifically, the literature searches are recommended to help in:
    — 'identify[ing] possible non-animal alternatives to all or part of the proposed study';
    — preventing unnecessary duplication of animal research;
    — 'identify[ing] efforts to reduce animal numbers'; and
    — finding and implementing refinements to painful and/or distressful procedures.
    We encourage researchers to think of these literature searches as not simply being a requirement but as a means to conduct better science. Reviewing the literature retrieved by these searches can allow a researcher to stay abreast of novel techniques, methods and protocols, as well as to fully incorporate any alternatives found.'
  • PREPARE is mentioned in a Norwegian-language article about the testing of new medicines (Tester medisiner på dårlige dyrestudier) in the magazine issued by the Norwegian National Research Ethics Committees in June 2018.
This page was updated on 05 March 2024

Did you find what you were looking for?

Yes, I found it! No, I did not!

Thanks for your feedback! Please note that we cannot reply to you unless you send us an email.

What are you looking for?

We value your feedback so we can improve the information on the page. Please add your email address if you would like a reply. Thank you in advance for your help.!

Please contact us by email if you have any questions.

Thanks for your feedback! Please note that we cannot reply to you unless you send us an email.


Abonnér på nyhetsbrevene fra Norecopa