3Rs missing: animal research without scientific value is unethical.

Q1 Medicine
BMJ Open Science Pub Date : 2019-07-04 eCollection Date: 2019-01-01 DOI:10.1136/bmjos-2018-000048
Daniel Strech, Ulrich Dirnagl
{"title":"3Rs missing: animal research without scientific value is unethical.","authors":"Daniel Strech,&nbsp;Ulrich Dirnagl","doi":"10.1136/bmjos-2018-000048","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The current, widely established 3R framework for the ethical use of animals in research consists of three guiding principles, that is, <i>R</i>eplacement, <i>R</i>eduction and <i>R</i>efinement, all aiming to safeguard the overarching ethical principle of animal welfare. However, animal welfare alone does not suffice to make animal research ethical if the research does not have sufficient scientific value. The scientific value of animal studies strongly decreases if they are not sufficiently robust, if their questions have already been sufficiently addressed or if the results are selectively reported. Against this background, we argue that three guiding principles are missing, that is, <i>R</i>obustness, <i>R</i>egistration and <i>R</i>eporting, all of which aim to safeguard and increase the scientific value of animal research. To establish a new 6R framework, we need a multistakeholder discourse to conceptualise the specific requirements of robustness, registration and reporting and to clarify responsibilities, competencies and legislation for auditing 6R compliance.</p>","PeriodicalId":9212,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Open Science","volume":"3 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-07-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1136/bmjos-2018-000048","citationCount":"46","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Open Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjos-2018-000048","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2019/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 46

Abstract

The current, widely established 3R framework for the ethical use of animals in research consists of three guiding principles, that is, Replacement, Reduction and Refinement, all aiming to safeguard the overarching ethical principle of animal welfare. However, animal welfare alone does not suffice to make animal research ethical if the research does not have sufficient scientific value. The scientific value of animal studies strongly decreases if they are not sufficiently robust, if their questions have already been sufficiently addressed or if the results are selectively reported. Against this background, we argue that three guiding principles are missing, that is, Robustness, Registration and Reporting, all of which aim to safeguard and increase the scientific value of animal research. To establish a new 6R framework, we need a multistakeholder discourse to conceptualise the specific requirements of robustness, registration and reporting and to clarify responsibilities, competencies and legislation for auditing 6R compliance.

Abstract Image

缺失3Rs:没有科学价值的动物研究是不道德的。
目前,广泛建立的研究中动物伦理使用的3R框架包括三个指导原则,即替代,减少和改进,所有这些都旨在维护动物福利的首要伦理原则。然而,如果动物研究没有足够的科学价值,仅凭动物福利不足以使动物研究具有伦理性。如果动物研究不够可靠,如果它们的问题已经得到充分解决,或者如果结果被选择性地报告,那么动物研究的科学价值就会大大降低。在此背景下,我们认为缺少三个指导原则,即稳健性,注册和报告,这些原则都旨在维护和提高动物研究的科学价值。为了建立一个新的6R框架,我们需要一个多利益相关者的话语来概念化稳健性、注册和报告的具体要求,并澄清审计6R合规性的责任、能力和立法。
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
BMJ Open Science
BMJ Open Science Medicine-General Medicine
CiteScore
10.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
9
审稿时长
31 weeks
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信