"Rodent chronic variable stress procedures: a disjunction between stress entity and impact on behaviour"
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2024.07.04.602063v1.full.pdf+html
We systematically investigated 350+ studies using chronic variable stress procedures in rodents and assessed the characteristics of the procedure (how many stressors they used, and how many different types, and for how long), then measured the reported effect size for those using behavioural tests as an outcome.
Some key disconcerting findings from our study
- the large majority of articles uses a unique protocol, and articles featuring the same protocol were from the same authors (aside from one case)
- 91% of articles don't provide any justification for their choice of procedure
This is scientifically and ethically troubling given CVS procedures deliberately impose suffering to animals.
- when looking at the outcome behavioural procedures measured in the studies (some of which impose further stress on the animals) we found very little correlation between effect size and the characteristics (eg length, strength) of the stress protocol. When there was a statistically significant effect, this was generally very small.
We conclude
"Most of the studies in our review sought evidence for interventions that would prevent or reverse the effects of chronic stress. But if we are to have any confidence that translational CVS studies provide a foundation for potential clinical interventions, we must take an evidence- and ethics-informed approach to their design."
#chronicVariableStress #stress #reproducibility #ethics #effectSize #translationalResearch #physiology
