Research Reporting Standards

The Jurnal Ilmu Peternakan dan Veteriner Tropis (JIPVET) is committed to publishing scientific research that is reported accurately, comprehensively, transparently, and in a manner that enables independent scientific evaluation.

Complete research reporting allows readers, reviewers, and editors to understand how a study was designed, conducted, analyzed, and interpreted. It also supports the assessment of methodological limitations, reproducibility, and the reliability of scientific conclusions.

JIPVET recognizes that research in animal and veterinary sciences encompasses experimental, observational, clinical, molecular, computational, qualitative, and evidence-synthesis approaches. Reporting requirements must therefore be appropriate to the actual research design.

This policy establishes the journal's expectations for transparent scientific reporting and identifies internationally recognized reporting guidelines relevant to the journal's scope.

1. General Research Reporting Principles

Authors must present an accurate and sufficiently detailed account of the research performed and the findings obtained.

All research manuscripts must:

• Clearly identify the research objectives, questions, and hypotheses, where applicable.
• Describe the actual study design and research setting.
• Explain the methods used to select research subjects, samples, observations, or experimental units.
• Provide sufficient information about procedures, measurements, instruments, and analyses.
• Report findings consistently with the collected and analyzed data.
• Distinguish observations, statistical results, interpretations, and speculative explanations.
• Report relevant uncertainty, limitations, exclusions, and missing information.
• Avoid unsupported causal conclusions and misleading statements about statistical significance.
• Present tables, figures, and supplementary materials accurately and transparently.
• Provide applicable ethical, funding, competing interests, authorship, and data availability declarations.

Authors must not fabricate, falsify, selectively misrepresent, or conceal research findings.

Research reporting must reflect the procedures actually performed. Methods, analyses, or approvals must not be described as completed when they were not undertaken.

2. Study-Specific Reporting Guidelines

JIPVET encourages authors to follow internationally recognized reporting guidelines that correspond to their research design.

Authors should select an appropriate reporting framework rather than applying a single checklist indiscriminately to all studies.

These guidelines support completeness and clarity of reporting. They do not replace independent evaluation of research quality, study validity, or ethical compliance.

Where no established checklist precisely matches the study, authors should apply the most relevant reporting principles and explain important design-specific information.

The editor may request a completed reporting checklist or clarification of selected checklist items when necessary for scientific assessment.

3. Research Design, Sampling, and Experimental Units

Authors must clearly describe the research design and the units on which observations, treatments, and analyses were based.

Depending on the study, the Methods section should identify:

• Study location and research period.
• The target population and the population actually sampled.
• Sampling methods and eligibility criteria.
• The number of research subjects, animals, farms, samples, or observations.
• The experimental unit, observational unit, and analytical unit.
• The allocation of treatments or groups, where applicable.
• The number and nature of biological and technical replicates.
• Inclusion and exclusion criteria and their implementation.
• Missing observations and relevant data exclusions.
• The rationale for the sample size where applicable.

Authors must distinguish independent biological replicates from repeated measurements or technical replicates.

Measurements taken repeatedly from the same animal, experimental unit, tissue preparation, or sample must not automatically be treated as independent observations.

Where hierarchical or clustered sampling occurs, such as animals within farms or repeated measurements within animals, the structure should be explained and addressed appropriately during analysis.

If sample size calculations, randomization, or blinding were not performed, authors must not claim that these procedures were undertaken.

4. Animal Experiments and Livestock Research

Research involving live animals must be reported with sufficient detail to evaluate scientific validity and animal welfare.

Experimental animal studies should address the relevant reporting items in ARRIVE 2.0. The ARRIVE Essential 10 provide a prioritized foundation for transparent reporting of in vivo animal experiments.

For randomized trials in livestock production, animal health, or food safety, REFLECT provides additional domain-specific guidance.

Relevant reporting information may include:

• Animal species, breed, age, sex, and physiological status.
• Animal source and relevant selection characteristics.
• Housing, feeding, and management conditions relevant to study outcomes.
• Description of interventions, treatments, controls, and measurement schedules.
• Randomization and allocation procedures, where performed.
• Blinding procedures, where applicable and actually implemented.
• Experimental units and sample sizes for each group.
• Animal welfare monitoring and humane endpoints.
• Adverse events, mortality, exclusions, and missing observations, where applicable.
• Animal ethics approval or a documented applicable exemption.

Ethical approval must be reported accurately. An ethics approval number may be included only when it was actually issued by an authorized body.

Reporting compliance with ARRIVE or REFLECT does not replace ethical approval or evidence that appropriate animal welfare procedures were followed.

5. Observational and Field Research

Observational studies involving livestock populations, farms, veterinary services, animal owners, or community settings should be reported according to the actual study design.

STROBE-Vet provides relevant guidance for observational veterinary and animal-population research.

Authors should describe:

• Study design, setting, and period.
• Selection of farms, households, animals, records, or respondents.
• Recruitment procedures and inclusion criteria.
• Sampling methods, sample sizes, and participation rates where available.
• Definitions and measurement of exposures, outcomes, and potential confounders.
• Questionnaire development or measurement procedures, where applicable.
• Data quality control and handling of incomplete observations.
• Relevant levels of organization, such as animal, herd, farm, household, or region.
• Statistical methods used to account for clustering, confounding, or repeated observations.
• Limitations relating to selection bias, measurement error, and generalizability.

Observational associations must not be presented as causal effects without an appropriate and adequately justified causal research design.

Authors should avoid extending conclusions beyond the populations, locations, periods, and variables actually studied.

Information identifying individual farmers, farm owners, households, or other participants must be protected according to applicable ethical and legal requirements.

6. Laboratory, Molecular, and Genomic Research

Laboratory and molecular research must report experimental procedures in sufficient detail for scientific assessment and appropriate replication.

Depending on the study type, authors should provide:

• Biological material, sample origin, collection procedures, and storage conditions.
• Laboratory equipment, relevant reagents, and analytical methods.
• Sample preparation, extraction, amplification, sequencing, or other procedures performed.
• Quality control and relevant validation procedures.
• Replicate structure, controls, and criteria for accepting results.
• Software, databases, reference sequences, and relevant versions.
• Data processing, filtering, alignment, and analytical procedures.
• Criteria for excluding samples or analytical outputs.
• Relevant uncertainty, limitations, and sources of error.

Genetic and genomic research should identify the molecular markers, genomic regions, reference datasets, and analytical methods used.

Sequence-based studies should report accession identifiers for publicly deposited sequence records where applicable.

GenBank, SRA, and other established sequence repositories may be used according to the type of research data.

Accession numbers must correspond to actual deposited records. Authors must not invent accession identifiers or cite sequences that have not been verified.

When molecular findings are interpreted in an evolutionary, genetic, or population context, analytical assumptions, reference selection, and important limitations should be described.

Where appropriate, authors should follow additional domain-specific reporting guidelines relevant to molecular assays, gene expression, or genetic association research.

7. Statistical and Computational Reporting

Statistical analyses must be reported accurately and consistently with the research design, sampling structure, and available data.

The Methods section should identify the analytical methods used and explain their relevance to the research questions.

Reporting should include, where applicable:

• The statistical or computational software used, including version information where relevant.
• The statistical models, tests, or algorithms applied.
• The outcome, explanatory, and adjustment variables included.
• The analytical unit and sample size used for each analysis.
• Model assumptions and relevant diagnostic procedures.
• Procedures for handling missing data, outliers, and exclusions.
• Adjustment for multiple comparisons, where appropriate.
• Effect estimates, measures of precision, and uncertainty where applicable.
• Criteria used for statistical inference.
• Relevant sensitivity, validation, or robustness analyses.

Exact p-values should be reported when appropriate and feasible. Statistical significance must not be inferred without a valid inferential analysis.

Authors should distinguish statistical significance from biological, veterinary, or practical importance.

Mean, standard deviation, standard error, confidence intervals, and other summary measures must be correctly identified and interpreted.

Results of exploratory analyses should not be presented as though they were prospectively specified confirmatory tests.

Computational and machine-learning studies should report relevant preprocessing, model development, validation, evaluation metrics, and potential data leakage.

Generated statistical values or computational outputs must not be represented as genuine analytical results without actual execution and verification.

8. Veterinary Clinical, Diagnostic, and Prediction Studies

Clinical and diagnostic veterinary studies require reporting appropriate to their objectives and clinical context.

Diagnostic accuracy studies should address relevant STARD reporting items, including:

• Study participants or animal populations.
• Selection and eligibility criteria.
• Index tests and reference standards.
• Timing and conduct of diagnostic procedures.
• Thresholds and their determination.
• Blinding or independent test interpretation, where applicable.
• Measures of diagnostic performance and their precision.
• Relevant exclusions, indeterminate results, and missing data.

Studies developing or evaluating diagnostic or prognostic prediction models should consider TRIPOD+AI where it matches the study objectives.

Clinical case reports may follow CARE or another suitable veterinary case-reporting framework.

Case reports must distinguish directly observed clinical findings from interpretations and unconfirmed diagnoses.

Clinical treatment outcomes and adverse events should be reported accurately, with due attention to limitations of uncontrolled study designs.

9. Reviews and Qualitative Research

Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses

Systematic reviews should describe a reproducible process for identifying, selecting, evaluating, and synthesizing research evidence.

PRISMA 2020 and relevant extensions should guide the reporting of eligible evidence synthesis studies.

Reporting should include, where applicable:

• Review objectives and eligibility criteria.
• Information sources and search dates.
• Full or sufficiently reproducible search strategies.
• Screening and selection procedures.
• Actual numbers of records identified, excluded, and included.
• Data extraction procedures and study characteristics.
• Risk-of-bias or methodological assessment where appropriate.
• Evidence synthesis and meta-analysis methods where performed.
• Limitations, uncertainty, and confidence in the evidence.

PRISMA flow counts must be derived from actual literature-search and screening records. Authors must not invent database counts, exclusions, or included studies.

A review must not be described as systematic when its methods do not support that classification.

Narrative Reviews

Narrative reviews should provide a clearly defined scholarly purpose, transparent explanation of literature selection, critical synthesis, and appropriate acknowledgment of limitations.

Narrative reviews must not imply exhaustive searching or systematic screening when those procedures were not conducted.

Qualitative and Mixed-Methods Research

Qualitative studies should describe participant selection, research setting, data collection, analytical procedures, and measures supporting interpretive credibility.

SRQR, COREQ, or other appropriate reporting guidance may be used according to study design.

Mixed-methods studies should explain the quantitative and qualitative components and how findings were integrated.

10. Presentation of Results, Tables, and Figures

Research results must be reported accurately and consistently with the data and analytical procedures described in the manuscript.

Tables and figures must be clear, appropriately labeled, and supported by the underlying data.

Authors should:

• Identify variables, groups, measurement units, and relevant sample sizes.
• Define abbreviations and statistical notation.
• Report denominators for percentages where relevant.
• Distinguish actual observations from modeled predictions or simulations.
• Use consistent numerical values throughout text, tables, figures, and supplementary materials.
• Explain error bars, uncertainty intervals, and statistical annotations.
• Disclose relevant image processing or manipulation.
• Identify any excluded observations or transformations affecting the results.

Numerical values must not be changed merely to improve the apparent strength of findings.

Image manipulation must not add, remove, obscure, or alter scientific features in ways that misrepresent observations.

Figures derived from simulations or conceptual illustrations must not be presented as experimental evidence.

The Discussion should interpret the reported findings in relation to the objectives, study design, existing evidence, and methodological limitations.

Conclusions must not extend beyond what the methods and results can support.

11. Research Ethics, Transparency, and Declarations

Transparent research reporting includes accurate disclosure of ethical oversight, research support, conflicts of interest, author contributions, and access to supporting data.

Depending on the manuscript, required information may include:

• Animal research ethical approval or a documented applicable exemption.
• Relevant consent and confidentiality arrangements for research involving people or identifiable data.
• Authorship and contributor declarations.
• Funding sources and the role of sponsors.
• Financial and non-financial competing interests.
• Data Availability Statements for original research.
• Relevant software, code, materials, and repository identifiers.
• Disclosure of generative AI use according to the journal's applicable policy.

Authors must not retrospectively claim ethical approval, participant consent, protocol registration, or other procedures that were not actually obtained or performed.

Data sharing must remain consistent with privacy, confidentiality, consent, and other legitimate access restrictions.

The availability of supporting data should be described accurately, including repository identifiers and justified restrictions where applicable.

Where protocol registration was undertaken or is required for a study type, authors should provide the relevant verified registration information.

12. Submission Compliance and Editorial Assessment

Authors are responsible for ensuring that submitted manuscripts meet the reporting requirements applicable to their study design.

JIPVET may request additional information or documentation when a manuscript contains reporting deficiencies that affect scientific assessment.

Such requests may concern:

• Study design and sample selection.
• Experimental units and independent replication.
• Missing methodological details.
• Statistical analyses and model assumptions.
• Supporting data and research records.
• Ethical approval and other declarations.
• Reporting checklist completion where relevant.
• Discrepancies between narrative results, tables, and figures.

The editor may request revisions before external peer review when essential reporting information is missing.

A completed reporting checklist does not automatically establish that a study is scientifically valid.

Likewise, the absence of a particular checklist does not automatically establish research misconduct.

Editorial evaluation considers the completeness and accuracy of reporting together with methodological quality, scientific contribution, and research integrity.

Serious concerns involving fabricated data, falsified results, inaccurate ethical declarations, or other research misconduct are addressed under the journal's Publication Ethics and Research Misconduct Policy.

Final editorial decisions remain the responsibility of authorized, unconflicted editors.