动物研究实践中政策驱动的变化:绘制研究者对无动物创新的态度,以荷兰为例。

IF 7.2 Q1 ETHICS
Research integrity and peer review Pub Date : 2019-04-23 eCollection Date: 2019-01-01 DOI:10.1186/s41073-019-0067-5
S Bressers, H van den Elzen, C Gräwe, D van den Oetelaar, P H A Postma, S K Schoustra
{"title":"动物研究实践中政策驱动的变化:绘制研究者对无动物创新的态度,以荷兰为例。","authors":"S Bressers,&nbsp;H van den Elzen,&nbsp;C Gräwe,&nbsp;D van den Oetelaar,&nbsp;P H A Postma,&nbsp;S K Schoustra","doi":"10.1186/s41073-019-0067-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Reducing the number of animals used in experiments has become a priority for the governments of many countries. For these reductions to occur, animal-free alternatives must be made more available and, crucially, must be embraced by researchers.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted an international online survey for academics in the field of animal science (<i>N</i> = 367) to explore researchers' attitudes towards the implementation of animal-free innovations. Through this survey, we address three key questions. The first question is whether scientists who use animals in their research consider governmental goals for animal-free innovations achievable and whether they would support such goals. Secondly, responders were asked to rank the importance of ten roadblocks that could hamper the implementation of animal-free innovations. Finally, responders were asked whether they would migrate (either themselves or their research) if increased animal research regulations in their country of residence restricted their research.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>While nearly half (40%) of the responders support governmental goals, the majority (71%) of researchers did not consider such goals achievable in their field within the near future. In terms of roadblocks for implementation of animal-free methods, ~ 80% of the responders considered 'reliability' as important, making it the most highly ranked roadblock. However, all other roadblocks were reported by most responders as somewhat important, suggesting that they must also be considered when addressing animal-free innovations. Importantly, a majority reported that they would consider migration to another country in response to a restrictive animal research policy. Thus, governments must consider the risk of researchers migrating to other institutes, states or countries, leading to a 'brain-drain' if policies are too strict or suitable animal-free alternatives are not available.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our findings suggest that development and implementation of animal-free innovations are hampered by multiple factors. We outline three pillars concerning education, governmental influence and data sharing, the implementation of which may help to overcome these roadblocks to animal-free innovations.</p>","PeriodicalId":74682,"journal":{"name":"Research integrity and peer review","volume":"4 ","pages":"8"},"PeriodicalIF":7.2000,"publicationDate":"2019-04-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1186/s41073-019-0067-5","citationCount":"7","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Policy driven changes in animal research practices: mapping researchers' attitudes towards animal-free innovations using the Netherlands as an example.\",\"authors\":\"S Bressers,&nbsp;H van den Elzen,&nbsp;C Gräwe,&nbsp;D van den Oetelaar,&nbsp;P H A Postma,&nbsp;S K Schoustra\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s41073-019-0067-5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Reducing the number of animals used in experiments has become a priority for the governments of many countries. For these reductions to occur, animal-free alternatives must be made more available and, crucially, must be embraced by researchers.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted an international online survey for academics in the field of animal science (<i>N</i> = 367) to explore researchers' attitudes towards the implementation of animal-free innovations. Through this survey, we address three key questions. The first question is whether scientists who use animals in their research consider governmental goals for animal-free innovations achievable and whether they would support such goals. Secondly, responders were asked to rank the importance of ten roadblocks that could hamper the implementation of animal-free innovations. Finally, responders were asked whether they would migrate (either themselves or their research) if increased animal research regulations in their country of residence restricted their research.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>While nearly half (40%) of the responders support governmental goals, the majority (71%) of researchers did not consider such goals achievable in their field within the near future. In terms of roadblocks for implementation of animal-free methods, ~ 80% of the responders considered 'reliability' as important, making it the most highly ranked roadblock. However, all other roadblocks were reported by most responders as somewhat important, suggesting that they must also be considered when addressing animal-free innovations. Importantly, a majority reported that they would consider migration to another country in response to a restrictive animal research policy. Thus, governments must consider the risk of researchers migrating to other institutes, states or countries, leading to a 'brain-drain' if policies are too strict or suitable animal-free alternatives are not available.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our findings suggest that development and implementation of animal-free innovations are hampered by multiple factors. We outline three pillars concerning education, governmental influence and data sharing, the implementation of which may help to overcome these roadblocks to animal-free innovations.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":74682,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Research integrity and peer review\",\"volume\":\"4 \",\"pages\":\"8\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-04-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1186/s41073-019-0067-5\",\"citationCount\":\"7\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Research integrity and peer review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s41073-019-0067-5\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2019/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ETHICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research integrity and peer review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s41073-019-0067-5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2019/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

摘要

背景:减少用于实验的动物数量已成为许多国家政府的优先事项。为了实现这些减少,必须提供更多的无动物替代品,而且至关重要的是,必须得到研究人员的支持。方法:对动物科学领域的学者(N = 367)进行了一项国际在线调查,了解研究人员对实施无动物创新的态度。通过这项调查,我们解决了三个关键问题。第一个问题是,在研究中使用动物的科学家是否认为政府的无动物创新目标是可以实现的,以及他们是否会支持这样的目标。其次,受访者被要求对可能阻碍实施无动物创新的十个障碍的重要性进行排名。最后,应答者被问及,如果居住国增加的动物研究法规限制了他们的研究,他们是否会迁移(他们自己或他们的研究)。结果:虽然近一半(40%)的受访者支持政府的目标,但大多数(71%)的研究人员认为,在不久的将来,这些目标在他们的领域是无法实现的。在实施无动物方法的障碍方面,约80%的应答者认为“可靠性”是重要的,使其成为排名最高的障碍。然而,大多数应答者报告的所有其他障碍都有些重要,这表明在解决无动物创新时也必须考虑这些障碍。重要的是,大多数人报告说,他们会考虑移民到另一个国家,以应对限制性动物研究政策。因此,政府必须考虑到如果政策过于严格或没有合适的无动物替代方案,研究人员迁移到其他研究所、州或国家的风险,从而导致“人才流失”。结论:无动物创新的发展和实施受到多种因素的阻碍。我们概述了有关教育、政府影响和数据共享的三大支柱,这些支柱的实施可能有助于克服无动物创新的这些障碍。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Policy driven changes in animal research practices: mapping researchers' attitudes towards animal-free innovations using the Netherlands as an example.

Policy driven changes in animal research practices: mapping researchers' attitudes towards animal-free innovations using the Netherlands as an example.

Policy driven changes in animal research practices: mapping researchers' attitudes towards animal-free innovations using the Netherlands as an example.

Policy driven changes in animal research practices: mapping researchers' attitudes towards animal-free innovations using the Netherlands as an example.

Background: Reducing the number of animals used in experiments has become a priority for the governments of many countries. For these reductions to occur, animal-free alternatives must be made more available and, crucially, must be embraced by researchers.

Methods: We conducted an international online survey for academics in the field of animal science (N = 367) to explore researchers' attitudes towards the implementation of animal-free innovations. Through this survey, we address three key questions. The first question is whether scientists who use animals in their research consider governmental goals for animal-free innovations achievable and whether they would support such goals. Secondly, responders were asked to rank the importance of ten roadblocks that could hamper the implementation of animal-free innovations. Finally, responders were asked whether they would migrate (either themselves or their research) if increased animal research regulations in their country of residence restricted their research.

Results: While nearly half (40%) of the responders support governmental goals, the majority (71%) of researchers did not consider such goals achievable in their field within the near future. In terms of roadblocks for implementation of animal-free methods, ~ 80% of the responders considered 'reliability' as important, making it the most highly ranked roadblock. However, all other roadblocks were reported by most responders as somewhat important, suggesting that they must also be considered when addressing animal-free innovations. Importantly, a majority reported that they would consider migration to another country in response to a restrictive animal research policy. Thus, governments must consider the risk of researchers migrating to other institutes, states or countries, leading to a 'brain-drain' if policies are too strict or suitable animal-free alternatives are not available.

Conclusion: Our findings suggest that development and implementation of animal-free innovations are hampered by multiple factors. We outline three pillars concerning education, governmental influence and data sharing, the implementation of which may help to overcome these roadblocks to animal-free innovations.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
5 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