Refining animal research: The Animal Study Registry

Bert, Bettina; Heinl, Céline; Chmielewska, Justyna; Schwärz, F.; Grune, Barbara; Hensel, Andreas; Greiner, Matthias; Schönfelder, Gilbert

doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.3000463

Cited by 50 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The Wellcome Success Framework highlights the importance of a long-term vision and shared objectives in order to take a more balanced approach to assessment [ 75 ]. The German Federal Ministry of Science and Education is funding preclinical confirmatory trials [ 76 ].…”

Section: Principle 3: Reward the Practice Of Open Science (Open Reseamentioning

confidence: 99%

The Hong Kong Principles for assessing researchers: Fostering research integrity

Moher

Bouter

Kleinert³

et al. 2020

PLoS Biol

290

184

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

For knowledge to benefit research and society, it must be trustworthy. Trustworthy research is robust, rigorous, and transparent at all stages of design, execution, and reporting. Assessment of researchers still rarely includes considerations related to trustworthiness, rigor, and transparency. We have developed the Hong Kong Principles (HKPs) as part of the 6th World Conference on Research Integrity with a specific focus on the need to drive research improvement through ensuring that researchers are explicitly recognized and rewarded for behaviors that strengthen research integrity. We present five principles: responsible research practices; transparent reporting; open science (open research); valuing a diversity of types of research; and recognizing all contributions to research and scholarly activity. For each principle, we provide a rationale for its inclusion and provide examples where these principles are already being adopted.

show abstract

Section: Principle 3: Reward the Practice Of Open Science (Open Reseamentioning

confidence: 99%

The Hong Kong Principles for assessing researchers: Fostering research integrity

Moher

Bouter

Kleinert³

et al. 2020

PLoS Biol

290

184

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Common criticisms of many animal models of disease, include the use of single sex, young animal cohorts, typically influenced by cost, time and infrastructure limitations as well as a desire to limit total animal numbers in line with the 3Rs. Introduction of experimental bias through lack of randomisation, blinding or inappropriate statistical analysis is also commonly criticised in many animal models (and research in general) but reassuringly, initiatives in education and transparency coupled with planning and reporting guidelines from scientific journals and research funders, may lead to improvements [21][22][23][24][25]…”

Section: Why Do Preclinical Sepsis Models Translate Poorly?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Rethinking animal models of sepsis – working towards improved clinical translation whilst integrating the 3Rs

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract Sepsis is a major worldwide healthcare issue with unmet clinical need. Despite extensive animal research in this area, successful clinical translation has been largely unsuccessful. We propose one reason for this is that, sometimes, the experimental question is misdirected or unrealistic expectations are being made of the animal model. As sepsis models can lead to a rapid and substantial suffering – it is essential that we continually review experimental approaches and undertake a full harm:benefit impact assessment for each study. In some instances, this may require refinement of existing sepsis models. In other cases, it may be replacement to a different experimental system altogether, answering a mechanistic question whilst aligning with the principles of reduction, refinement and replacement (3Rs). We discuss making better use of patient data to identify potentially useful therapeutic targets which can subsequently be validated in preclinical systems. This may be achieved through greater use of construct validity models, from which mechanistic conclusions are drawn. We argue that such models could provide equally useful scientific data as face validity models, but with an improved 3Rs impact. Indeed, construct validity models may not require sepsis to be modelled, per se. We propose that approaches that could support and refine clinical translation of research findings, whilst reducing the overall welfare burden on research animals.

show abstract

“…The wider scientific community, including funding bodies and journals, must encourage the publication of both negative results and replication studies. Greater use of pre-registration sites will help in this respect [14,15,16,17]. The culture of ‘publish or perish’ that encourages publication quantity over quality, and overzealous focus on high-impact journals, also needs to be challenged.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Role of the Three Rs in Improving the Planning and Reproducibility of Animal Experiments

Smith

Lilley

2019

Animals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Simple SummaryEfforts to improve the design of animal studies have tended to focus on the more mathematical aspects, such as randomization, blocking and statistical analysis. There are, however, many other factors that affect the data from preclinical studies. To improve validity, scientists must collaborate closely with the animal facility involved as soon as the decision to use animals has been made. Such discussions will also help to improve animal welfare, as well as any health and safety issues. A large number of guidelines have been produced over the last 20 years for reporting results in the scientific literature. Comprehensive guidelines for planning animal experiments have been produced more recently, to fulfill this need. These will be described in this paper. A commitment to improving animal welfare, scientific quality, staff care and transparency for all stakeholders will also foster a culture of care around animal research, which benefits all parties. All the Three Rs of Russell and Burch (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) play a role in the planning and reproducibility of research and testing which may involve animals.AbstractTraining in the design of animal experiments focuses all too often on those aspects which can be approached mathematically, such as the number of animals needed to deliver a robust result, allocation of group size, and techniques such as randomization, blocking and statistical analysis. Important as they are, these are only a small part of the process of planning animal experiments. Additional key elements include refinements of housing, husbandry and procedures, health and safety, and attention at all stages to animal welfare. Advances in technology and laboratory animal science have led to improvements in care and husbandry, better provision of anesthetics and analgesics, refined methods of drug administration, greater competence in welfare assessment and application of humane endpoints. These improvements require continual dialogue between scientists, facility managers and technical staff, a practice that is a key feature of what has become known as the culture of care. This embodies a commitment to improving animal welfare, scientific quality, staff care and transparency for all stakeholders. Attention to both the physical and mental health of all those directly or indirectly involved in animal research is now an important part of the process of planning and conducting animal experiments. Efforts during the last 30 years to increase the internal and external validity of animal experiments have tended to concentrate on the production of guidelines to improve the quality of reporting animal experiments, rather than for planning them. Recently, comprehensive guidelines for planning animal studies have been published, to redress this imbalance. These will be described in this paper. Endorsement of this overarching influence of the Three R concept, by all the stakeholders, will not only reduce animal numbers and improve animal welfare, but also lead to more reliable and repr...

show abstract

Refining animal research: The Animal Study Registry

Cited by 50 publications

References 35 publications

The Hong Kong Principles for assessing researchers: Fostering research integrity

The Hong Kong Principles for assessing researchers: Fostering research integrity

Rethinking animal models of sepsis – working towards improved clinical translation whilst integrating the 3Rs

The Role of the Three Rs in Improving the Planning and Reproducibility of Animal Experiments

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About