Assessing the Search for and Implementation of the Three Rs: A Survey among Scientists

Leenaars, Marlies; Savenije, B.; Nagtegaal, A.; Vaart, L. van der; Ritskes‐Hoitinga, Merel

doi:10.1177/026119290903700312

Cited by 20 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…8 This could imply that specifically searching for 3R information is not the most fruitful way of accumulating relevant 3R information. 8,12 Strengthening personal communication between researchers, AWOs and other experts seems a better way to go, as this is already perceived to be an important source of 3R information. This might be achieved by forming 3R expert groups, which would include an AWO, a statistician and possibly a Replacement expert.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The outline of the questionnaire was developed by the second author (YC) and was based on: (1) a previously conducted survey among researchers involved in animal-based research at the Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre 8 and (2) in-depth semi-structured interviews with five researchers, two AEC members and one AWO. The survey was descriptive in nature and included both qualitative and quantitative questions.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Assessing the application of the 3Rs: a survey among animal welfare officers in The Netherlands

et al. 2013

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Implementation of the 3Rs (Replacement, Refinement and Reduction) in animal studies is a legal requirement in many countries. In The Netherlands, animal welfare officers (AWOs) are appointed to monitor the welfare of laboratory animals. As part of this task, AWOs give advice to researchers and can therefore have an influential role in implementing 3R methods in research. A national survey was conducted to gain more insight into how Dutch AWOs obtain and apply 3R information in their daily work. Nearly half of the AWO population filled out the questionnaire (15/32; a response rate of 46.9%). Two-thirds of the respondents pointed out that finding 3R information is not an easy task and more than half of the respondents believed that information on possibilities to implement the 3Rs is regularly being missed. The respondents indicated that most 3R information is obtained directly from colleagues and other AWOs. Special online 3R databases are rarely used. All the responding AWOs feel that they contribute to Refinement (15/15), nearly one-third of the respondents feel they contribute to Reduction (4/15), and one AWO feels he/she contributes to Replacement (1/15). According to the respondents, better exchange of knowledge can contribute to more successful implementation of the 3Rs. How this knowledge exchange can best be established and facilitated needs further exploration. To this end, the authors make suggestions for a 3R-integrated evidence-based approach.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing the application of the 3Rs: a survey among animal welfare officers in The Netherlands

et al. 2013

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…From an animal ethics standpoint the reduction of the number of animals used is highly desirable, and one of the three Rs is Reduction (27). In addition to the reduced number of animals used, the decrease in stress most certainly improves the situation for the mice and is desirable as long as not stress or anxiety is studied (1).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Escalated handling of young C57BL/6 mice results in altered Morris water maze performance

Fridgeirsdottir

Hillered

Clausen

2013

Upsala Journal of Medical Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The handling of experimental animals prior to experimental interventions is often poorly described, even though it may affect the final functional outcome. This study explores how the use of repeated handling of C57BL/6 mice prior to Morris water maze (MWM) tests can affect the performance.Methods and materials The handled animals were subjected to the escalating handling protocol, with the investigator spending 5 min per day per cage for 8 days prior to the MWM test. On the last days of handling, the mice were introduced to water and the concept of a hidden platform. The MWM test consisted of four daily trials for 90 s per day for 4 days with a hidden platform. A probe test was performed 4 days after the last learning trial. Control animals were not handled prior to MWM.Results Handling reduced the latency to find the platform on the first 2 days of the MWM tests and reduced thigmotaxis. The mice increased their swim speed and elicited more explorative behavior in the learning trials and to some lesser extent in the probe trials.Conclusions The improvement in MWM navigation was most likely due to reduced stress and anxiety regarding the investigator and the test. Handled mice displayed less variability than non-handled mice, suggesting that by using a controlled handling protocol prior to the experiments fewer C57BL/6 mice would be needed to achieve statistically significant differences in studies of learning and spatial memory using MWM.

show abstract

“…Within animal research, more than 100 databases and websites are available containing specific information on laboratory animal science. 9,17 This information is not necessarily available in the more regularly used major biomedical databases. It may be worthwhile checking for potentially relevant papers in a few of these databases as well.…”

Section: Effective Methodology and Approach: The Step-by-step Guidementioning

confidence: 99%

A step-by-step guide to systematically identify all relevant animal studies

et al. 2012

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Before starting a new animal experiment, thorough analysis of previously performed experiments is essential from a scientific as well as from an ethical point of view. The method that is most suitable to carry out such a thorough analysis of the literature is a systematic review (SR). An essential first step in an SR is to search and find all potentially relevant studies. It is important to include all available evidence in an SR to minimize bias and reduce hampered interpretation of experimental outcomes. Despite the recent development of search filters to find animal studies in PubMed and EMBASE, searching for all available animal studies remains a challenge. Available guidelines from the clinical field cannot be copied directly to the situation within animal research, and although there are plenty of books and courses on searching the literature, there is no compact guide available to search and find relevant animal studies. Therefore, in order to facilitate a structured, thorough and transparent search for animal studies (in both preclinical and fundamental science), an easy-to-use, step-by-step guide was prepared and optimized using feedback from scientists in the field of animal experimentation. The step-by-step guide will assist scientists in performing a comprehensive literature search and, consequently, improve the scientific quality of the resulting review and prevent unnecessary animal use in the future.

show abstract

Assessing the Search for and Implementation of the Three Rs: A Survey among Scientists

Cited by 20 publications

References 11 publications

Assessing the application of the 3Rs: a survey among animal welfare officers in The Netherlands

Assessing the application of the 3Rs: a survey among animal welfare officers in The Netherlands

Escalated handling of young C57BL/6 mice results in altered Morris water maze performance

A step-by-step guide to systematically identify all relevant animal studies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About