CRIME-Q| Study design(s) targeted by the tool | Animal studiesanimal-studies |
|---|---|
| Additional details on designs | applicable to multiple study designs in single tool |
| Tool area | Animal studies |
| Link to the tool | CRIME-Q tool |
Details | |
| Website | |
| Primary publication | Andersen, M.S., Kofoed, M.S., Paludan-Müller, A.S. et al. CRIME-Q—a unifying tool for critical appraisal of methodological (technical) quality, quality of reporting and risk of bias in animal research. BMC Med Res Methodol 24, 306 (2024) |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-024-02413-0 |
| Guidance document | |
| Training | None known – please contact us if you are aware of any training that should be listed here. |
| Language | English |
| Translations | None known – please contact us if you are aware of any translations that should be listed here. |
| Record last updated | 10/01/2025 |
Related tools and Publications | |
| Previous versions | None |
| Updated versions | None |
| Related tools | Including items from and inspired primarily by the following tools and checklists: Macleod et al.(2004) with the reliability and validity tested Collaborative Approach to Meta Analysis and Review of Animal Data from Experimental Studies (CAMARADES) checklist, Cramond et al. (2016), the ARRIVE 2.0 [10] guidelines and the validated SYRCLE’s risk of bias tool, which is based on the Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias in randomized trials. |
| Evaluations | Tool article includes interrater reliability on 114 articles (https://bmcmedresmethodol.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12874-024-02413-0#Bib1) |
| Other publications | |
Key Criteria | |
| Focuses on risk of bias, or makes a distinction between items that assess risk of bias and other aspects of study quality | Yes |
| Offers a method to reach either a domain specific or overall assessment of risk of bias | Yes |
| Tool development involving a range of stakeholders from different disciplines (e.g. methodologists, statisticians, clinicians) | Yes |
| Avoids recommending use of summary numerical quality scores | Yes |
