MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400224575 · doi:10.1038/s41467-024-49439-y

Improving laboratory animal genetic reporting: LAG-R guidelines

2024· review· en· W4400224575 on OpenAlexaff
Lydia Teboul, James Amos‐Landgraf, Fernando Benavides, Marie‐Christine Birling, Steve D. M. Brown, Elizabeth C. Bryda, Rosie Bunton-Stasyshyn, Hsian‐Jean Chin, Martina Crispo, Fabien Delerue, Michael Dobbie, Craig L. Franklin, Ernst‐Martin Füchtbauer, Xiang Gao, Christelle Golzio, Rebecca Haffner, Yann Hérault, Martin Hrabě de Angelis, K. C. Kent Lloyd, Terry Magnuson, Lluı́s Montoliu, Stephen A. Murray, Ki‐Hoan Nam, Lauryl M. J. Nutter, Éric Pailhoux, Fernando Pardo‐Manuel de Villena, Kevin A. Peterson, Laura G. Reinholdt, Radislav Sedláček, Je Kyung Seong, Toshihiko Shiroishi, Cynthia L. Smith, Toru Takeo, Jonathon M. Tinsley, Jean-Luc Vilotte, Søren Warming, Bruce Whitelaw, Atsushi Yoshiki, Chi‐Kuang Leo Wang, Jacqueline Marvel, Ana Zarubica, Sara Wells, Jason D. Heaney, Ian Korf, Cathleen Lutz, Andrew J. Kueh, Paul Q. Thomas, Ruth M. Arkell, Graham J. Mann, Guillaume Pavlovic

Bibliographic record

VenueNature Communications · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicAnimal testing and alternatives
Canadian institutionsToronto Centre for PhenogenomicsSickKids Foundation
FundersNational Human Genome Research InstituteBiotechnology and Biological Sciences Research CouncilMedical Research CouncilNational Science and Technology CouncilAgence Nationale de la RechercheAkademie Věd České RepublikyNational Cancer InstituteNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsStandardizationDocumentationReplication (statistics)Computer scienceReliability (semiconductor)Consistency (knowledge bases)Data scienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The biomedical research community addresses reproducibility challenges in animal studies through standardized nomenclature, improved experimental design, transparent reporting, data sharing, and centralized repositories. The ARRIVE guidelines outline documentation standards for laboratory animals in experiments, but genetic information is often incomplete. To remedy this, we propose the Laboratory Animal Genetic Reporting (LAG-R) framework. LAG-R aims to document animals' genetic makeup in scientific publications, providing essential details for replication and appropriate model use. While verifying complete genetic compositions may be impractical, better reporting and validation efforts enhance reliability of research. LAG-R standardization will bolster reproducibility, peer review, and overall scientific rigor.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.200
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.234
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: Reporting · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.800
Threshold uncertainty score0.987

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.2000.234
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.005
Bibliometrics0.0130.009
Science and technology studies0.0020.007
Scholarly communication0.0090.005
Open science0.0120.006
Research integrity0.0100.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.032

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.438
GPT teacher head0.548
Teacher spread0.110 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
DomainReporting
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations18
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNature CommunicationsSame topicAnimal testing and alternativesFrench-language works237,207