The inclusion of animals in research studies involves a great responsibility to ensure animal welfare within the relevant ethical and legal frameworks. This study aimed to review compliance with the ARRIVE Essential 10 requirements and the ethical oversight of animal behaviour and welfare studies in farm animals. Three journals and a total of 133 articles were reviewed for compliance with the ARRIVE Essential 10 items and criteria. Each article obtained a final score according to whether or not each criterion was met within each item. Likewise, ethical declaration in each article was recorded. Chi-square test and linear models were built to assess associations between the ethical statement presentation and the final ARRIVE Essential 10 score with the country, the species, and the journal. We found that 15% of the articles did not present an ethical statement. The journal with the highest impact factor and the countries of the Global South presented an ethical statement more frequently. Regarding the Essential 10, the item with the lowest agreement score was ‘Blinding’ and the one with the highest agreement was ‘Outcome Measures’. Also, significant differences were found between journals in terms of the Essential 10 score. Essential 10 provides relevant information that allows reviewers and readers to identify possible welfare risks and the validity of the results in animal welfare science publications.

More from our Archive

• DOI: 10.1111/beer.12573 2023

  Impact of digital transformation on performance of environment, social, and governance: Empirical evidence from China

  Quan‐Jing Wang, Hai‐Jie Wang, Gen‐Fu Feng, Chun‐Ping Chang

• DOI: 10.1111/beer.12572 2023

  The differential impact of substantive and symbolic CSR attribution on job satisfaction and turnover intention

  Xin Chen, Eric Hansen, Jianfeng Cai, Jichang Xiao

• DOI: 10.46222/pharosjot.104.411 2023

  The Use of Smartphones to Communicate the Gospel of Jesus Christ

  Gedala Mulliah Naidoo

• DOI: 10.1111/mila.12466 2023

  Creating a large language model of a philosopher

  Eric Schwitzgebel, David Schwitzgebel, Anna Strasser

• DOI: 10.1177/14777509231188830 2023

  The paradox of medical necessity

  Samantha Godwin, Brian D Earp

• DOI: 10.1111/beer.12576 2023

  Not all stakeholders are equal: Corporate social responsibility variability and corporate financial performance

  Yongqiang Gao, Yumeng Nie, Taïeb Hafsi

• DOI: 10.1111/japp.12674 2023

  Responsibility for Future Climate Justice: The Direct Responsibility to Mitigate Structural Injustice for Future Generations

  Daan Keij, Boris Robert van Meurs

• DOI: 10.1111/josh.13360 2023

  Academic Accommodations for Middle and High School Students Following a Concussion: Perspectives of Teachers and School Administrators

  Heather A. Shepherd, Keith O. Yeates, Nick Reed, Jeffrey G. Caron, Kathryn J. Schneider, Carolyn A. Emery, Amanda M. Black

• DOI: 10.1111/beer.12574 2023

  Corporate environmental efforts, government environmental subsidies, and corporate <scp>non‐environmental</scp> R&amp;D intensity: Evidence from listed firms

  Weihong Chen, David Diwei Lv, Christina W. Y. Wong

• DOI: 10.1111/pops.12906 2023

  Why Chile “Woke Up.” Antecedents of the Formation of Prochange Group Consciousness Promoting Collective Action

  Stefanie Hechler, Maria Chayinska, Clara Sophie Wekenborg, Felipe Moraga‐Villablanca, Thomas Kessler, Craig McGarty