Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Animal Experimentation and Research Commons™
Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Animal Experimentation and Research
The Usefulness Of Systematic Reviews Of Animal Experiments For The Design Of Preclinical And Clinical Studies, Rob B.M. De Vries, Kimberley E. Weaver, Marc T. Avey, Martin Stephens, Emily S. Sena, Marlies Leenaars
The Usefulness Of Systematic Reviews Of Animal Experiments For The Design Of Preclinical And Clinical Studies, Rob B.M. De Vries, Kimberley E. Weaver, Marc T. Avey, Martin Stephens, Emily S. Sena, Marlies Leenaars
Martin Stephens, PhD
The question of how animal studies should be designed, conducted, and analyzed remains underexposed in societal debates on animal experimentation. This is not only a scientific but also amoral question. After all, if animal experiments are not appropriately designed, conducted, and analyzed, the results produced are unlikely to be reliable and the animals have in effect been wasted. In this article, we focus on one particular method to address this moral question, namely systematic reviews of previously performed animal experiments. We discuss how the design, conduct, and analysis of future (animal and human) experiments may be optimized through such systematic …
Systematic Reviews Of Animal Experiments Demonstrate Poor Contributions To Human Healthcare, Andrew Knight
Systematic Reviews Of Animal Experiments Demonstrate Poor Contributions To Human Healthcare, Andrew Knight
Andrew Knight, PhD
Widespread reliance on animal models during preclinical research and toxicity testing assumes their reasonable predictivity for human outcomes. However, of 20 published systematic reviews examining human clinical utility located during a comprehensive literature search, animal models demonstrated significant potential to contribute toward clinical interventions in only two cases, one of which was contentious. Included were experiments expected by ethics committees to lead to medical advances, highly-cited experiments published in major journals, and chimpanzee experiments—the species most generally predictive of human outcomes. Seven additional reviews failed to demonstrate utility in reliably predicting human toxicological outcomes such as carcinogenicity and teratogenicity. Results …
The Usefulness Of Systematic Reviews Of Animal Experiments For The Design Of Preclinical And Clinical Studies, Rob B.M. De Vries, Kimberley E. Weaver, Marc T. Avey, Martin Stephens, Emily S. Sena, Marlies Leenaars
The Usefulness Of Systematic Reviews Of Animal Experiments For The Design Of Preclinical And Clinical Studies, Rob B.M. De Vries, Kimberley E. Weaver, Marc T. Avey, Martin Stephens, Emily S. Sena, Marlies Leenaars
Experimentation Collection
The question of how animal studies should be designed, conducted, and analyzed remains underexposed in societal debates on animal experimentation. This is not only a scientific but also amoral question. After all, if animal experiments are not appropriately designed, conducted, and analyzed, the results produced are unlikely to be reliable and the animals have in effect been wasted. In this article, we focus on one particular method to address this moral question, namely systematic reviews of previously performed animal experiments. We discuss how the design, conduct, and analysis of future (animal and human) experiments may be optimized through such systematic …
Systematic Reviews Of Animal Experiments Demonstrate Poor Contributions To Human Healthcare, Andrew Knight
Systematic Reviews Of Animal Experiments Demonstrate Poor Contributions To Human Healthcare, Andrew Knight
Experimentation Collection
Widespread reliance on animal models during preclinical research and toxicity testing assumes their reasonable predictivity for human outcomes. However, of 20 published systematic reviews examining human clinical utility located during a comprehensive literature search, animal models demonstrated significant potential to contribute toward clinical interventions in only two cases, one of which was contentious. Included were experiments expected by ethics committees to lead to medical advances, highly-cited experiments published in major journals, and chimpanzee experiments—the species most generally predictive of human outcomes. Seven additional reviews failed to demonstrate utility in reliably predicting human toxicological outcomes such as carcinogenicity and teratogenicity. Results …