Reporting and justification of sample size in translational chronic variable stress procedures: A systematic review

Abstract All in vivo studies using laboratory animals should be guided by the Three Rs: Replacement, Reduction and Refinement. The concept of Reduction is important in sample size estimation; the sample size used should allow the detection of a biologically meaningful effect size using appropriate statistical tests, but not at the expense of animal suffering. Because studies using chronic variable stress (CVS) procedures deliberately impose suffering, we reasoned that Three Rs principles would be a strong consideration in experimental design. To explore this, we conducted a systematic review of CVS studies to ask whether a biologically meaningful effect size was used to determine the sample size. Only one article in our sample of 385 reported doing this. Accordingly, it is questionable whether most of these studies align strongly with the principle of Reduction. While determining a biologically meaningful effect size is not always straightforward, we believe it is central to making biologically informed decisions about study design and interpretation, and we discuss possible ways forward. Competing Interest Statement The authors have declared no competing interest. Footnotes Competing interests: The authors have no competing interests. JM conceived the study. CJ, NR and JM performed the research, analysed the data and wrote the paper.