Literature DB >> 25333594

Evaluating the ethical acceptability of animal research.

Henriëtte J Bout1, J Martje Fentener van Vlissingen2, Edgar D Karssing3.   

Abstract

The ethical acceptability of animal research is typically evaluated on a case-by-case basis. Legislation such as Directive 2010/63/EU on the protection of animals used for scientific purposes provides guidance for ethical evaluation of animal use proposals but does not dictate the outcome, leaving this determination to the ethical review committees of individual institutions. The authors assess different ethics models and how these are reflected in the guidelines of Directive 2010/63/EU. They also describe a matrix for carrying out harm-benefit analyses of animal use proposals, which they identified by examining the practices of three ethical review committees in the Netherlands. Finally, they discuss how this matrix can be applied by ethical review committees at other institutions.

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25333594     DOI: 10.1038/laban.572

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Lab Anim (NY)        ISSN: 0093-7355            Impact factor:   12.625


  7 in total

1.  Decision Making and the IACUC: Part 1- Protocol Information Discussed at Full-Committee Reviews.

Authors:  Jerald Silverman; Charles W Lidz; Jonathan C Clayfield; Alexandra Murray; Lorna J Simon; Richard G Rondeau
Journal:  J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci       Date:  2015-07       Impact factor: 1.232

Review 2.  Current concepts of Harm-Benefit Analysis of Animal Experiments - Report from the AALAS-FELASA Working Group on Harm-Benefit Analysis - Part 1.

Authors:  Aurora Brønstad; Christian E Newcomer; Thierry Decelle; Jeffrey I Everitt; Javier Guillen; Kathy Laber
Journal:  Lab Anim       Date:  2016-06       Impact factor: 2.471

3.  Necessary, but Not Sufficient. The Benefit Concept in the Project Evaluation of Animal Research in the Context of Directive 2010/63/EU.

Authors:  Matthias Eggel; Herwig Grimm
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2018-02-28       Impact factor: 2.752

4.  No Pain, No Gain? In Defence of Genetically Disenhancing (Most) Research Animals.

Authors:  Katrien Devolder; Matthias Eggel
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2019-04-09       Impact factor: 2.752

Review 5.  Recommendations for Addressing Harm-Benefit Analysis and Implementation in Ethical Evaluation - Report from the AALAS-FELASA Working Group on Harm-Benefit Analysis - Part 2.

Authors:  Kathy Laber; Christian E Newcomer; Thierry Decelle; Jeffrey I Everitt; Javier Guillen; Aurora Brønstad
Journal:  Lab Anim       Date:  2016-06       Impact factor: 2.471

6.  The Road to Hell Is Paved with Good Intentions: Why Harm-Benefit Analysis and Its Emphasis on Practical Benefit Jeopardizes the Credibility of Research.

Authors:  Herwig Grimm; Matthias Eggel; Anna Deplazes-Zemp; Nikola Biller-Andorno
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2017-09-11       Impact factor: 2.752

7.  Reviewing the Review: A Pilot Study of the Ethical Review Process of Animal Research in Sweden.

Authors:  Svea Jörgensen; Johan Lindsjö; Elin M Weber; Helena Röcklinsberg
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2021-03-05       Impact factor: 2.752

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.