Ethical Perspectives Influence the Formation of Researchers' Perceptions of Experimental Conduct in a Preclinical Animal Experimentation Training Program.

Daehyun Han, Jungmin Lee, Hyelim Kwon, Dongyoub Shin, Byunghyun Choi, Youngil Park, Chulhee Kim, Byong Chang Jeong, Jae Berm Park
{"title":"Ethical Perspectives Influence the Formation of Researchers' Perceptions of Experimental Conduct in a Preclinical Animal Experimentation Training Program.","authors":"Daehyun Han, Jungmin Lee, Hyelim Kwon, Dongyoub Shin, Byunghyun Choi, Youngil Park, Chulhee Kim, Byong Chang Jeong, Jae Berm Park","doi":"10.30802/AALAS-JAALAS-26-016","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Animal experimentation is conducted under regulatory and institutional frameworks that require ethical standards, safety management, scientific validity, and compliance with relevant guidelines. Accordingly, institutions that conduct preclinical research are responsible for providing structured training programs that prepare researchers to conduct animal experiments appropriately. However, empirical evaluations of such training programs and their outcomes remain limited. This study evaluated a comprehensive preclinical animal experimentation training program covering ethics, regulatory requirements, safety, and technical knowledge, using survey data collected from researchers who completed the program at Samsung Medical Center. The Kirkpatrick training evaluation model was applied as an analytical framework, and partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) was used to explore researchers' perceptions of animal experimentation conduct. The results demonstrated that the training program was associated with improved researcher perceptions, supported by acceptable reliability and validity of the measurement instrument. In particular, perceptions related to animal research ethics were significantly associated with experimental performance. An exploratory structural model was developed to identify key determinants of researcher perceptions and to support future refinement of training evaluation approaches. These findings suggest that well-designed training programs can foster ethically grounded and practically oriented attitudes among researchers, thereby strengthening accountability in animal experimentation and supporting the implementation of the Replacement, Reduction, and Refinement (3Rs) principles. This study provides evidence-based insights for institutions, training coordinators, and oversight bodies seeking to improve laboratory animal research training programs.</p>","PeriodicalId":94111,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science : JAALAS","volume":" ","pages":"1-9"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13446396/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science : JAALAS","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.30802/AALAS-JAALAS-26-016","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Animal experimentation is conducted under regulatory and institutional frameworks that require ethical standards, safety management, scientific validity, and compliance with relevant guidelines. Accordingly, institutions that conduct preclinical research are responsible for providing structured training programs that prepare researchers to conduct animal experiments appropriately. However, empirical evaluations of such training programs and their outcomes remain limited. This study evaluated a comprehensive preclinical animal experimentation training program covering ethics, regulatory requirements, safety, and technical knowledge, using survey data collected from researchers who completed the program at Samsung Medical Center. The Kirkpatrick training evaluation model was applied as an analytical framework, and partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) was used to explore researchers' perceptions of animal experimentation conduct. The results demonstrated that the training program was associated with improved researcher perceptions, supported by acceptable reliability and validity of the measurement instrument. In particular, perceptions related to animal research ethics were significantly associated with experimental performance. An exploratory structural model was developed to identify key determinants of researcher perceptions and to support future refinement of training evaluation approaches. These findings suggest that well-designed training programs can foster ethically grounded and practically oriented attitudes among researchers, thereby strengthening accountability in animal experimentation and supporting the implementation of the Replacement, Reduction, and Refinement (3Rs) principles. This study provides evidence-based insights for institutions, training coordinators, and oversight bodies seeking to improve laboratory animal research training programs.

伦理观点影响临床前动物实验训练计划中研究人员对实验行为认知的形成。
动物实验是在监管和制度框架下进行的,这些框架要求道德标准、安全管理、科学有效性和遵守相关准则。因此,进行临床前研究的机构有责任提供结构化的培训计划,使研究人员能够适当地进行动物实验。然而,对此类培训项目及其结果的实证评估仍然有限。本研究评估了全面的临床前动物实验培训计划,包括伦理、监管要求、安全性和技术知识,使用了从三星首尔医院完成该计划的研究人员收集的调查数据。采用Kirkpatrick训练评价模型作为分析框架,采用偏最小二乘结构方程模型(PLS-SEM)探讨研究者对动物实验行为的认知。结果表明,培训计划与提高研究者的认知有关,并得到测量仪器可接受的信度和效度的支持。特别是,与动物研究伦理相关的认知与实验表现显著相关。开发了一个探索性结构模型,以确定研究人员感知的关键决定因素,并支持未来改进培训评估方法。这些发现表明,设计良好的培训计划可以培养研究人员以道德为基础和以实践为导向的态度,从而加强动物实验的问责制,并支持替代、减少和改进(3Rs)原则的实施。本研究为寻求改进实验动物研究培训计划的机构、培训协调员和监督机构提供了基于证据的见解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书