17. Interpretation/ scientific implications Comment on the study limitations including potential sources of bias, limitations of the animal model, and imprecision associated with the results. explanation

Discussing the limitations of the work is important to place the findings in context, interpret the validity of the results, and ascribe a credibility level to its conclusions [1]. Limitations are unavoidable in scientific research, and describing them is essential to share experience, guide best practice, and aid the design of future experiments [2].

Discuss the quality of evidence presented in the study, and consider how appropriate the animal model is to the specific research question. A discussion on the rigour of the study design to isolate cause and effect (also known as internal validity [3]) should include whether potential risks of bias have been addressed [4] (see item 2 – Sample size, item 3 – Inclusion and exclusion criteria, item 4 – Randomisation and item 5 – blinding).

References

1. Ioannidis JP (2007). Limitations are not properly acknowledged in the scientific literature. J. Clin. Epidemiol. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.09.011
2. Puhan MA, Akl EA, Bryant D, Xie F, Apolone G and ter Riet G (2012). Discussing study limitations in reports of biomedical studies- the need for more transparency. Health Qual Life Outcomes. doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-10-23
3. Wieschowski S, Chin WWL, Federico C, Sievers S, Kimmelman J and Strech D (2018). Preclinical efficacy studies in investigator brochures: Do they enable risk–benefit assessment? PLOS Biology. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.2004879
4. Reichlin TS, Vogt L and Würbel H (2016). The Researchers’ View of Scientific Rigor—Survey on the Conduct and Reporting of In Vivo Research. PLoS ONE. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0165999