Suppr超能文献

欧洲的动物实验非技术性摘要有所改善吗?最新进展。

Have the non-technical summaries of animal experiments in Europe improved? An update.

机构信息

Cruelty Free Europe, Brussels, Belgium.

Animal Welfare Academy of the German Animal Welfare Federation, Neubiberg, Germany.

出版信息

ALTEX. 2024;41(3):382-394. doi: 10.14573/altex.2310181. Epub 2024 Mar 14.

Abstract

Following a review of Directive 2010/63/EU on the protection of animals used for scientific pur­poses in the European Union (EU), non-technical project summaries (NTS) of all approved projects must be published in a central database using a standard template. Our initial review of the NTS reported in ALTEX in 2018 had found the NTS to be deficient in their accessibility and quality, notably the “adverse effects” section where the harms to the animals are meant to be described. Here we repeat our review to see if these legislative changes have improved the accessibility and quality of the NTS. As before, we focused on the NTS from the United Kingdom (UK) and Germany; even though the UK has left the EU, it is using the same template. We found significant improvement in the reporting of five of the six elements we identified as essential to the “predicted harms” section. However, there was no significant improvement in the reporting of adverse effects. Only 41% of German NTS and 48% of UK NTS are fully reporting this important element of the “predicted harms” section. In our view, researchers need support in describing the impact of their research on the animals and to assist here we include a checklist for competent authorities and a list of suggested terminology for standard administration and sampling procedures. Unless the NTS improve further, their utility as a tool for sharing of good practices in the 3Rs or to support evidence-based policy­making will remain limited.

摘要

在对 2010/63/EU 号指令(关于在欧盟保护用于科学目的的动物)进行审查后,所有已批准项目的非技术项目摘要(NTS)必须使用标准模板在中央数据库中公布。我们在 2018 年的 ALTEX 杂志上首次报告的 NTS 审查发现,NTS 在可及性和质量方面存在缺陷,尤其是“不良影响”部分,旨在描述对动物的伤害。在这里,我们再次审查这些立法变化是否提高了 NTS 的可及性和质量。与以往一样,我们重点关注英国(UK)和德国的 NTS;尽管英国已经离开欧盟,但它仍在使用相同的模板。我们发现,我们确定的“预测危害”部分的六个要素中,有五个要素的报告有了显著改善。然而,不良影响的报告没有显著改善。只有 41%的德国 NTS 和 48%的英国 NTS 完全报告了“预测危害”部分这一重要要素。在我们看来,研究人员需要支持来描述其研究对动物的影响,为了提供帮助,我们包括了一份供主管当局使用的检查表和一份关于标准管理和抽样程序的建议术语清单。除非 NTS 进一步改进,否则它们作为分享 3Rs 良好实践或支持循证决策的工具的效用将仍然有限。

相似文献

1
Have the non-technical summaries of animal experiments in Europe improved? An update.
ALTEX. 2024;41(3):382-394. doi: 10.14573/altex.2310181. Epub 2024 Mar 14.
2
Recommendations to improve the EU non-technical summaries of animal experiments.
ALTEX. 2018;35(2):193-210. doi: 10.14573/altex.1708111. Epub 2017 Nov 29.
3
Animal welfare and the 3Rs in European biomedical research.
Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2011 Dec;1245:14-6. doi: 10.1111/j.1749-6632.2011.06335.x.
4
Transparency in Non-Technical Project Summaries to Promote the Three Rs in Respiratory Disease Research.
Altern Lab Anim. 2022 Sep;50(5):349-364. doi: 10.1177/02611929221121076. Epub 2022 Sep 15.
6
Rethinking 3R strategies: Digging deeper into AnimalTestInfo promotes transparency in in vivo biomedical research.
PLoS Biol. 2017 Dec 14;15(12):e2003217. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.2003217. eCollection 2017 Dec.

引用本文的文献

1
Identifying trends in reporting on the ethical treatment of insects in research.
PLoS One. 2025 Aug 18;20(8):e0328931. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0328931. eCollection 2025.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验