Links to guidelines
On this page you can find a collection of helpful links to guidelines that are already in place. These guidelines are published by several organisations or researchers and have different focuses.

We have organised them in following groups:

    • General Guidelines
    • Guidelines for Publishers
    • Guidelines for Experiments
    Guidelines on Reporting

This is not an exhaustive list of guidelines and we would appreciate any recommendations on additional material on this list. Please drop as an Email:

General Guidelines

GSP document by DFG

Proposal for Safeguarding Good Scientific Practice by the German Research Foundation (DFG). The first recommendations were published in 1997 with an updated version published in 2013. It builds “the basis for the DFG’s continuing endeavours to accord the highest importance to safeguarding good scientific practice as an essential prerequisite for research and as the core task of self-regulation in research”.

WHO quality practices

The WHO provides in this handbook guidance for research institutions and individual researchers to improve the quality of their research data. These practices were especially designed for a non-regulatory quality management system.

Steward and Balice-Gordon, 2014 Neuron

Review of best practices and presentation of new guidelines with a focus on preclinical studies relevant to human neurological and psychiatric disorders.

Guidelines by the European Science Foundation (ESF)

The European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity

Intended to provide an europe-wide reference, this code addresses the proper conduct and principled practice of systematic research in the medical, natural and social sciences and the humanities. It was established in 2010 by 31 research funding and performing organisations from 22 countries, together with All European Academies (ALLEA).

Working group: Comparative Research Portfolios
First document of a series released by different working groups as a basis for further discussions. The ESF presents here the basic ideas for the need to capture information about the progress, productivity and quality of research and whether these systems are already in place or need to be established.

Working Group 2: Impact Assessment
This document describes the complex field of assessing the impact of research. Pros and cons of different methodologies are discussed focusing on impact assessment in relation to public research funding.

Working Group 3: Comparative Research Portfolios
The work of this group is the extension of a previous working group on this topic and completed the previous guidelines in respect to research output. e.g. publication, intellectual property, commercialisation…

Ioannidis and Khoury, 2014 JAMA

In this viewpoint the assessing value in biomedical research is discussed based on research that is Productive, High-quality, Reproducible, Shareable and Translatable (PQRST).

Guidelines for Publishers

The Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)

The Committee on Publication Ethics was established in 1997 and has grown to over 10000 members. It provides advice on publication ethics, but also on how to handle misconduct in scientific publications.

Nosek et al., 2015 Science

Brian Nosek et al. present in this communication an informative introduction to standards set-up by the Transparency and Openness Promotion (TOP) committee to facilitate a culture of open research (e.g. the publication of null results). A comprehensive table is provided summarizing the eight standards and three levels of TOP guidelines.

“The TOP Guidelines”

Guidelines for Transparency and Openness Promotion (TOP) in Journal Policies and Practices which are published by the Center for Open Science (COS).

Guidelines for Experiments

flow cytometry experiments

Lee et al., 2008 Journal of the International Society for Advancement of Cytometry (“MIFlowCyt”)

Guidelines about the Minimum Information a Flow Cytometry Experiment should contain. These guidelines give a general overview on how to report cytometry experiments.

MIATA guidelines

This webpage provides useful information on how to publish data derived from flow cytometry experiments in particular when analysing T-cells and NK-cells. It describes the set of information and data to be included in material and method sections to be able to understand and reproduce published experiments.

RIGOR guidelines (Lapchak et al. 2013 Trans. Stroke Res.)
Comprehensive guidelines especially designed for research in animal models of stroke. However, it does contain basic aspects that can be applied to other animal experiments.

Guidelines on Reporting

Moher et al., 2015 BMC Medicine

Overview of published guidelines on reporting preclinical research.

Bravo et al., 2015 BMC Medicine

Guideline on how to cite bioresources (CoBRA).

Simera et al., 2010 Eur J of Clin Invest

Introduction to the EQUATOR Network, which provides resources, education and training to facilitate good research reporting and assists in the development, dissemination and implementation of robust reporting guidelines.

STROBE Statement

“STROBE stands for an international, collaborative initiative of epidemiologists, methodologists, statisticians, researchers and journal editors involved in the conduct and dissemination of observational studies, with the common aim of STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology.”
On their homepage they provide for example a checklist of items that should be reported in observational studies.

Arrive guidelines

These guidelines were presented by the National Centre for the Replacement, Refinement and Reduction of Animals in Research (NC3Rs) and provide an excellent checklist, which includes a range of factors to consider when performing and/or publishing experiments involving animals.

Steckler et al. 2016 editorial in psychopharmacology
These recently published guidelines for the Journal of Psychopharmacology are a great example on information to be reported with animal experiments.