Hurst, VikiScience Manager – Experimental Design and Reporting, NC3Rs, London, United Kingdom
Ahluwalia, AmritaDirector of the Barts Cardiovascular CTU, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom
Alam, SabinaDirector of Publishing Ethics and Integrity, Taylor & Francis Group, London, United Kingdom
Avey, Marc T.Lead Health Scientist, Health Science Practice, ICF, Durham, North Carolina, United States of America
Baker, MonyaSenior Editor, Opinion, Nature, San Francisco, California, United States of America
Browne, William J.Professor of Statistics, School of Education, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
Clark, AlejandraSenior Editor, Team Manager – Life Sciences, PLOS ONE, Cambridge, United Kingdom
Cuthill, Innes C.Professor of Behavioural Ecology, School of Biological Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
Dirnagl, UlrichDirector, QUEST Center for Transforming Biomedical Research, Berlin Institute of Health & Department of Experimental Neurology, Charite Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
Emerson, MichaelReader in Platelet Pharmacology, National Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom
Garner, PaulProfessor, and Director of the Centre for Evidence Synthesis in Global Health, Clinical Sciences Department, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, United Kingdom
Holgate, Stephen T.MRC Clinical Professor, Clinical and Experimental Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, United Kingdom
Howells, David W.Professor of Neuroscience and Brain Plasticity, Tasmanian School of Medicine, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia
Karp, Natasha A.Principal Scientist – Statistician & UK Team Lead, Data Sciences & Quantitative Biology, Discovery Sciences, R&D, AstraZeneca, Cambridge, United Kingdom
Lazic, Stanley E.Chief Scientific Officer, Prioris.ai Inc, Ottawa, Canada
Lidster, KatieProgramme Manager – Animal Welfare, NC3Rs, London, United Kingdom
Petersen, Ole H.Director of the Academia Europaea Knowledge Hub, Cardiff University, Cardiff, United Kingdom
Rawle, FrancesDirector of Policy, Ethics and Governance, Medical Research Council, London, United Kingdom
Reynolds, PennyBiostatistician, Statistics in Anesthesiology Research (STAR) Core & Research Assistant Professor, Department of Anesthesiology College of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, United States of America
Rooney, KieronAssociate Professor, Discipline of Exercise and Sport Science, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
Sena, Emily S.Stroke Association Kirby Laing Foundation Senior Non-Clinical Lecturer, Centre for Clinical Brain Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
Silberberg, Shai D.Director of Research Quality, National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, Bethesda, Maryland, United States of America
English Reproducible science requires transparent reporting. The ARRIVE guidelines (Animal Research: Reporting of In Vivo Experiments) were originally developed in 2010 to improve the reporting of animal research. They consist of a checklist of information to include in publications describing in vivo experiments to enable others to scrutinise the work adequately, evaluate its methodological rigour, and reproduce the methods and results. Despite considerable levels of endorsement by funders and journals over the years, adherence to the guidelines has been inconsistent, and the anticipated improvements in the quality of reporting in animal research publications have not been achieved. Here, we introduce ARRIVE 2.0. The guidelines have been updated and information reorganised to facilitate their use in practice. We used a Delphi exercise to prioritise and divide the items of the guidelines into 2 sets, the “ARRIVE Essential 10,” which constitutes the minimum requirement, and the “Recommended Set,” which describes the research context. This division facilitates improved reporting of animal research by supporting a stepwise approach to implementation. This helps journal editors and reviewers verify that the most important items are being reported in manuscripts. We have also developed the accompanying Explanation and Elaboration document, which serves (1) to explain the rationale behind each item in the guidelines, (2) to clarify key concepts, and (3) to provide illustrative examples. We aim, through these changes, to help ensure that researchers, reviewers, and journal editors are better equipped to improve the rigour and transparency of the scientific process and thus reproducibility.