Chronic administration of R-flurbiprofen attenuates learning impairments in transgenic amyloid precursor protein mice
Kukar T, Prescott S, Eriksen JL, ... Koo EH, Golde TE
Paper source
Chronic administration of R-flurbiprofen attenuates learning impairments in transgenic amyloid precursor protein mice
This rigor review was examined and confirmed by Adcurare Editorial · July 28, 2026
How this rating was calculated▸
- IntegrityIntegrity concern ×5−2.5★
- StatisticsImpossible or misreported statistic ×2−2★
- StatisticsStatistic did not reproduce ×3−1.5★
- ReportingKey resources not met−0.5★
- ReportingStatistical analysis not met−0.5★
- ReportingData & code availability not met−0.5★
- ReportingStudy design partially met−0.25★
A demonstrable critical failure caps the rating at the minimum, regardless of the deductions above.
- References were not verified against Crossref/OpenAlex.
- No data or code availability links were detected to verify.
- Significance claim flips when recomputed
- Statistical analysis inadequately reported
- Data and code not shared
- Key resources not identified
- Reported statistics do not recompute
- Study-design details incomplete (controls, blinding, power)
- Internal contradictions in the reported numbers
- Other integrity concern
This Adcurare Rigor Review uses AI Rigor Reviewers trained on a curated corpus of high-fidelity and retracted papers, with expert supervision and curation. It can still make mistakes; verify each finding against the source before relying on it.
- • Recomputed 13 tests: 8 consistent, 5 inconsistent (2 change significance at p<.05), 13 via agent-written checks.
The paper has a strong scientific premise, adequate ethical approvals, and generally transparent reporting, but it is undermined by major gaps in study design (randomization, blinding), incomplete identification of key resources, deficient statistical reporting (including verified inconsistencies and a rounding error), and a complete absence of data/code availability. These issues collectively reduce confidence in the published findings and warrant a correction or re-analysis.
Three independent reviewers (all AI) fully agreed on dimension statuses, strengthening reliability. The statistics verification component recomputed 13 tests (coverage limited to those with test statistic+df or effect+CI), finding 5 inconsistencies and 2 decision errors. The copyedit pass flagged 11 minor issues. No citation concerns were raised. The study is a published preclinical interventional paper; this assessment is a post-publication audit.
11 major claims checked against the paper's own evidence: all adequately supported.
Recomputed 13 tests: 8 consistent, 5 inconsistent (2 change significance at p<.05), 13 via agent-written checks.
5 integrity concerns flagged (0 high).
11 copyedit issues flagged: mostly typo, consistency, clarity.
As a published paper, the robustness is compromised by the statistical inconsistencies (5 of 13 tests inconsistent, including 2 decision errors) and a mathematical plausibility issue (31% of 15 mice is non-integer). An informed reader should weigh whether these errors affect the paper's conclusions. The authors should consider issuing a correction or providing a re-analysis with corrected p-values and clarification of the rounding error. The missing data availability statement limits reproducibility.
- 1.CRITICALstatisticsRe-analyze the 5 inconsistent tests (including the 2 decision errors) identified by the statistics verification component, report corrected p-values, and re-evaluate whether conclusions change.5 of 13 recomputed tests were inconsistent with reported values, and 2 p-values reported as significant were non-significant on recomputation, indicating a potential data analysis error that could affect the paper's conclusions.
- 2.CRITICALstatisticsClarify the rounding error in the strategy preference result: 31% of 15 mice is 4.65, not an integer. Provide exact counts or state that the percentage is an approximation.This inconsistency suggests a potential data reporting error or miscalculation that undermines the credibility of the reported result.
- 3.HIGHdata codeAdd a data availability statement specifying how raw behavioral and biochemical data can be accessed (e.g., on request from the authors or via a repository).The current paper provides no way for readers to access the underlying data, which is a major barrier to reproducibility and verification.
- 4.HIGHrigorProvide full identifiers (vendor, catalog number, RRID) for all antibodies and key reagents, including the source of R-flurbiprofen (manufacturer, catalog number, purity).Without these identifiers, other researchers cannot reproduce the experiments or verify the reagents used.
- 5.HIGHrigorDescribe the randomization method used to assign mice to treatment groups, or state clearly why randomization was not feasible.The current assignment based on age introduces potential confounding and is a significant methodological limitation.
- 6.HIGHrigorReport whether investigators were blinded to treatment group during behavioral testing and data analysis, or state clearly why blinding was not performed.Blinding is a standard safeguard against bias; its absence is a major concern for the validity of behavioral results.
- 7.HIGHstatisticsReport exact p-values (e.g., p = 0.023) for all statistical tests instead of threshold values, and include effect sizes (e.g., Cohen's d) and 95% confidence intervals for primary outcomes.Threshold p-values are insufficient for precise interpretation, and effect sizes are essential for understanding the magnitude of effects.
- 8.HIGHstatisticsIdentify the statistical software used (e.g., SPSS, GraphPad Prism) with version number in the Methods section.The software used can affect the reproducibility of analyses, and its absence is a reporting gap.
- 9.MEDIUMreportingAdd a formal conflicts of interest statement, even if stating that the authors declare no competing interests.Transparency about potential conflicts is a standard requirement for most journals.
- 10.MEDIUMreportingReference the ARRIVE guidelines for reporting animal research, and provide a completed checklist as supplementary material.Adherence to reporting guidelines is recommended by many journals and improves the completeness and transparency of the report.
- 11.MEDIUMcopyeditCorrect the typo in Table 2 header: 'Tg2575' should be 'Tg2576'.This is a clear typographical error that could cause confusion about the mouse strain used.
- 12.MEDIUMcopyeditStandardize the drug name to 'R-flurbiprofen' throughout the manuscript (remove extra spaces and hyphens).Inconsistent formatting of the drug name is distracting and may appear unprofessional.
- 13.MEDIUMrigorProvide a scientific justification for using only female mice, or discuss the implications of this limitation.Single-sex studies without justification may limit the generalizability of the findings.
- 14.LOWreportingConsider showing individual data points in all figures (e.g., dot plots) alongside bar graphs to reveal distribution and variability.Bar graphs with error bars can obscure the underlying data distribution; individual points improve transparency.
Adcurare assesses methodological rigor, not the importance of the findings. See how we evaluate →